Re: Is this normal?

[Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 962 bytes --]

Paweł Staszewski wrote:
> I have Linux that works as Router + traffic management with connection 
> tracking enabled but without making NAT
> 
> About 600Mbit/s TX and 600Mbit/s RX forwarded traffic
> 
> iptables -L -n -v -t raw
> Chain PREROUTING (policy ACCEPT 3340M packets, 2623G bytes)
> pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               
> destination
> 3339M 2621G NOTRACK    all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            
> 0.0.0.0/0
> 
> 
> kernel 2.6.28.2
> CPU: Core 2, speed 2999.98 MHz (estimated)
> Counted CPU_CLK_UNHALTED events (Clock cycles when not halted) with a 
> unit mask of 0x00 (Unhalted core cycles) count 100000
> samples  %        image name               app name                 
> symbol name
> 14544205 15.8604  vmlinux                  vmlinux                  
> ctnetlink_del_expect

This doesn't seem to be accurate, I'm guessing its really
ctnetlink_conntrack_event().

Does this patch make any difference?

[-- Attachment #2: x --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 567 bytes --]

diff --git a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.h b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.h
index e78afe7..c25068e 100644
--- a/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.h
+++ b/include/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_core.h
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ static inline int nf_conntrack_confirm(struct sk_buff *skb)
 	struct nf_conn *ct = (struct nf_conn *)skb->nfct;
 	int ret = NF_ACCEPT;
 
-	if (ct) {
+	if (ct && ct != &nf_conntrack_untracked) {
 		if (!nf_ct_is_confirmed(ct) && !nf_ct_is_dying(ct))
 			ret = __nf_conntrack_confirm(skb);
 		nf_ct_deliver_cached_events(ct);