Re: [PATCH] Fix repeatable Oops on container destroy with conntrack

Re: [PATCH] Fix repeatable Oops on container destroy with conntrack

[Pablo Neira Ayuso]

On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 09:01:34AM +0100, Alex Bligh wrote:
> --On 14 September 2011 03:35:00 +0200 Pablo Neira Ayuso
> <pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:
> 
> >>Is this new version OK? I am happy to adjust if not.
> >
> >Hm, I still think that this is a workaround.
> 
> It is a bit of a workaround, that is true. But it is a workaround
> that will fix the bug in every kernel since 2.6.32 (and perhaps
> before - I haven't looked). It's thus reasonably easily applicable
> to stable kernel series.

The container support for netfilter seems to be in intermediate state,
we need several patches to get it finished that:

* subsys_table definition in nfnetlink.c.
* ctnl_notifier and ctnl_notifier_exp definitions in
  nfnetlink_conntrack.c
* similar things for nfnetlink_queue and nfnetlink_log.

If nobody is going to fix all these, I'll find some spare time to do
it myself, but I don't think we'll have a proper fix that we can pass
to -stable. This will have to go to net-next, given the amount of
patches that we'll need to appropriately fix this.

> I'm not clued-up enough on Netfilter to know what the right fix is,
> but is applying the workaround in a commit which could be easily
> backported, then applying the 'right fix' (assuming that is different)
> a reasonable strategy?
> 
> As you can probably tell, my interest here is to get something that
> doesn't oops into stable kernels.

As said, I'm not sure that this can happen, given that the amount of
patches that we need to fix it fine, sorry.

Re: [PATCH] Fix repeatable Oops on container destroy with conntrack

[Alex Bligh]

--On 28 September 2011 23:08:51 +0200 Pablo Neira Ayuso 
<pablo@netfilter.org> wrote:

>> As you can probably tell, my interest here is to get something that
>> doesn't oops into stable kernels.
>
> As said, I'm not sure that this can happen, given that the amount of
> patches that we need to fix it fine, sorry.

This is why I was suggesting the 2 line "don't oops" patch in the
interim.

-- 
Alex Bligh