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 0BB1B32720C for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 16:11:12 +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=1773245475; cv=none; b=UCVdTfn/inpXSKbwMwYwzBmX4iJhq9htjZEELLsrdUtZPobb4B3vy+xm5OcvzTsg6gUaq8u64bSuIEzQ0gEA9xKRls5pKBNx38xEknEU9gyIU7Se3JDX3zF38Pek3OWr4O3gJPGdcMOutF8azavMEUY2txR1RMNO9WaTlitTyes= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1773245475; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZXJw0/WwAuHp1Eot1/pghvdqbvlcl2XqmQs+Dr/JbaA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=uE/SExO5Vk7Pc5ar07G5+IaK/A9H/ot8CDlzpeHNW7UTEkOJob8VuYUDiGBOsEqTmyFmpW8XNrPHDofbLHEeRuV87eAhrtX57Ikd6j4D0kioNg1OdCy5wrl/BGaLU2Yl4IPPpqiVbO3bvZXn2ITPXmzOM9EpOAg6H/Mqm7N6jz4= 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=F2RTeDav; 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="F2RTeDav" Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id AA3E2603C4; Wed, 11 Mar 2026 17:11:10 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1773245470; bh=iBrXZ7Ir8U1IospeUqCMetA9mZR0M5BukVUrOWJyqCo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=F2RTeDavaE9292Z/TtjWCZpt73YluRkoN5rHVaU5Yw+aP0L+dFzoGHbLAJw3Tcxfl ZnFDQ3Y3gBW6+6IMfcQ7cnjMKtTT0HW7PJMlA7tz2bbgg1xiE78Y3MyiN8XiKVNC3d qsEBKVOlKUi0/AAJkxAfsl24OgS8HeTPOdlA2d4p7eqHWRBjXVLQufK8OXdRfJQIVQ IhDeNr5zCC32saCiidGR+rus8yk7b5JknKOAb/lg9qN2eLR5mCaF09KcC0cBRQ2bRJ hfUaQzPS37h9wrRc3DCMj7THbuf76dSpEiR79tgWSuoxxo02qRRWNy4K6zj9PeiDgz tOVv+MfxpUTlQ== Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 17:11:08 +0100 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Florian Westphal Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH nf] netfilter: revert nft_set_rbtree: validate open interval overlap Message-ID: References: <20260311152916.17696-1-fw@strlen.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260311152916.17696-1-fw@strlen.de> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 04:29:12PM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: > This reverts commit 648946966a08 ("netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: validate > open interval overlap"). > > There have been reports of nft failing to laod valid rulesets after this > patch was merged into -stable. > > I can reproduce several such problem with recent nft versions, including > nft 1.1.6 which is widely shipped by distributions. The culprit is this bug in userspace: e83e32c8d1cd mnl: restore create element command with large batches At the same time, 1.1.6 is broken because of this bug _regardless_ this patch. > We currently have little choice here. > This commit can be resurrected at some point once the nftables fix that > triggers the false overlap positive has appeared in common distros > (see e83e32c8d1cd ("mnl: restore create element command with large batches" in > nftables.git). Yes, we can just wait for the userspace fix to propagate, then merge this in again. It is very unfortunate that this userspace bug in the way. > Fixes: 648946966a08 ("netfilter: nft_set_rbtree: validate open interval overlap") > Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal > > --- > Pablo, if you prefer a different approach, e.g. just axing > the relevant check instead of full revert please let me know. I can think of workaround such as adding a temporary sysctl knob to disable this... but it is ugly. Probably it is more sensible to revert temporarily and wait for a bit of time for the e83e32c8d1cd userspace bugfix to propagate downstream. Acked-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso