From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [NETFILTER 11/39]: conntrack: fix race condition in early_drop Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:39:56 +0200 Message-ID: <4511288C.4070805@trash.net> References: <20060920082442.14636.6806.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <20060920082457.14636.39699.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <45112555.4040803@drugphish.ch> <45112663.2090500@trash.net> <45112776.7000705@drugphish.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netfilter-devel@lists.netfilter.org, davem@davemloft.net, w@1wt.eu Return-path: To: Roberto Nibali In-Reply-To: <45112776.7000705@drugphish.ch> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org Errors-To: netfilter-devel-bounces@lists.netfilter.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org Roberto Nibali wrote: > Patrick McHardy wrote: > >> Not really. We can exceed the limit by a few entries, but its still >> bounded. The same can happen anyway because only entries in the hash >> are counted. > > > Ok, thanks for your time. We have a similar situation in 2.4 LVS code > (unpatched for years now) and I was just curious if defects like this > get addressed in 2.4 kernels nowadays. I reckon so long as noone > complains, we don't do anything; at least that's how I understood you. Yes, I don't want to break anything in 2.4 by "fixing" problems noone is experiencing.