From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.netfilter.org (mail.netfilter.org [217.70.190.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 819A047C0FB; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 20:22:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788898948; cv=none; b=TIzAuDcAcpEe6eSTPemG9P2ZKU1nW0nmOvgz2fQPHxW4IoEceg2hlidj7iH41E4fpfjxGcrPLUYdbTnMeAWVZyDT3qO/m+wFPQh7aPdBO4lkS+AhVwR7huqwcOIAVTV/MakddPJCqRdTxZEdjNBz41cYM4W+pWsIdBlqOZ7WLLU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788898948; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kbcJM10vswzb01MGh03wm8TBWwgp09kILK4FwARAnBo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=HM/fBmg/TvPTIh4oYddgH9xut+vsOV2HysXMj65j5yXwWPBMmV9h9RutTo9nr9eZRKcA54taqe7eJctb1EeKrWc6bJlY16NzWVvtpiF/T8a40q/Hr/K6+mJBCTWszoJcmosAYHH1cQU90bZjeGtFxPL3Wu3vLDuw+OYUZ1wPKHc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b=euhQcsuF; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.70.190.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=netfilter.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netfilter.org header.i=@netfilter.org header.b="euhQcsuF" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1788898936; bh=YuL7eguvenr6cY8dYQV22pUh1OvPbx22hujU7gbJsnQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=euhQcsuFsldjDV0gGv29FSG+u78wMvdroeQHNSKkr8DPl7ignwU+PIMfZYjNF/NZv Y9nQzpN2R6q4fGTAv3pweuHHjeBMwv6rdwjC5U3uCcxN6diVQ9YL3bhzsHJMPFf1px MlNH5YfFmRw+2E1B+E+CyMmgSl2Wl1rjqZV9A7WyorZUEQQxhJhzaLmZ/t+6vvkO4u 8lPIY9uIe/VD7kmOwjhPqdWgA7vftVz45XlxCD4UawzodwZk3z88r0Y4SjyQDgqzUK GPQi7e4V+qWkKQmYiseGv8BXnPfi4qSRO+1Lklngu2IacUrDfSjSpYPEom/TGdKDZt 8klAzHwMLAOuQ== Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id 439716008A; Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:22:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 22:22:13 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, horms@kernel.org, fw@strlen.de, ja@ssi.bg Subject: Re: [PATCH net 8/9] netfilter: ip6_tables: set F_PROTO when proto value is nonzero Message-ID: References: <20260907171732.1407739-9-pablo@netfilter.org> <178889064403.219967.3259522251975828189@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <178889064403.219967.3259522251975828189@kernel.org> On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 06:04:04PM +0000, netdev-bot+sashiko@kernel.org wrote: > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential > issue(s) to consider: > > Critical: 0 · High: 0 · Medium: 0 · Low: 1 > > - [Low] Stale/contradicted UAPI documentation for `struct > ip6t_ip6::proto`. > > -- > > netfilter: ip6_tables: set F_PROTO when proto value is nonzero > > This makes the kernel set IP6T_F_PROTO for any rule that carries a nonzero > ipv6.proto, so ip6_packet_match() always performs the protocol comparison > and extension header walk instead of skipping it when userspace left the > flag clear. It mirrors the normalisation already done in nft_compat.c. > > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c > > index f42fb96ef64b6..313c4aac377aa 100644 > > --- a/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c > > +++ b/net/ipv6/netfilter/ip6_tables.c > > @@ -647,6 +647,11 @@ check_entry_size_and_hooks(struct ip6t_entry *e, > > /* Clear counters and comefrom */ > > e->counters = ((struct xt_counters) { 0, 0 }); > > e->comefrom = 0; > > + > > + /* set F_PROTO, else ip6_packet_match won't do the right thing. */ > > + if (e->ipv6.proto) > > + e->ipv6.flags |= IP6T_F_PROTO; > > + > > return 0; > > } > > [Severity: Low] > Should the uapi header comment be updated in the same patch? No.