From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: [PATCH 20/38] netns ct: NOTRACK in netns Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 13:54:29 +0200 Message-ID: <48C11DF5.9040207@netfilter.org> References: <20080821220432.GT31136@x200.localdomain> <48C012B8.10606@trash.net> <20080905025838.GA2789@x200.localdomain> <48C11918.8020508@trash.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexey Dobriyan , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org To: Patrick McHardy Return-path: In-Reply-To: <48C11918.8020508@trash.net> Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Patrick McHardy wrote: > Alexey Dobriyan wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 06:54:16PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: >>> adobriyan@gmail.com wrote: >>>> Make untracked conntrack per-netns. Compare conntracks with relevant >>>> untracked one. >>>> >>>> The following code you'll start laughing at this code: >>>> >>>> if (ct == ct->ct_net->ct.untracked) >>>> ... >>>> >>>> let me remind you that ->ct_net is set in only one place, and never >>>> overwritten later. >>>> >>>> All of this requires some surgery with headers, otherwise horrible >>>> circular >>>> dependencies. And we lost nf_ct_is_untracked() as function, it >>>> became macro. >>> I think you could avoid this mess by using a struct nf_conntrack >>> for the untracked conntrack instead of struct nf_conn. It shouldn't >>> make any difference since its ignored anyways. >> >> Ewww, can I? > > I hope so :) A different possiblity suggest by Pablo some time ago > would be to mark untracked packets in skb->nfctinfo and not > attach a conntrack at all. Indeed, I remember that :). I left that patch of the table time ago [1]. There's a nf_reset call missing as Patrick said at that time. I can recover it if you like the idea. [1] http://lists.netfilter.org/pipermail/netfilter-devel/2005-June/020171.html -- "Los honestos son inadaptados sociales" -- Les Luthiers