From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso Subject: Re: Multi-thread udp 4.7 regression, bisected to 71d8c47fc653 Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:25:17 +0200 Message-ID: <20160712142517.GA1919@salvia> References: <20160627142238.GA10613@breakpoint.cc> <20160627153820.GB10613@breakpoint.cc> <20160705122803.GA26862@salvia> <20160711162642.GA5462@salvia> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Florian Westphal , netdev , Thorsten Leemhuis , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org To: Marc Dionne Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netfilter-devel.vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 11, 2016 at 06:17:39PM -0300, Marc Dionne wrote: > Hi Pablo, > > Testing out your patch: > > 1) With no NAT in place, the clash resolution happens, with no side > effects. No EPERM errors are seen. > > 2) With ip(6)table_nat loaded, the clash resolution fails and I get > some EPERM errors from sendmsg(), same as before 71d8c47fc653. > > Turns out that even though I have no NAT rules in my iptables config, > the system also had firewalld active and that caused the modules to be > loaded. > > So the bottom line is that the patch looks good to me.. Thanks Marc, I'm going to apply this then.