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 0BBE62F8EAA; Sun, 27 Sep 2026 23:04:12 +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=1790550254; cv=none; b=ubySFwpegpoI9TOLyZbt9c1y046vUMn3pfMfVUVwCSMRw5pb3YuyqMYtCvzsiA3ClY+1qhZqsmiAYh3c4bXyokhPGbw9zsyUPYehw8O0/VwulDk13tm3pewRkJdSEiYYbEPf6utJJeHMGA7bJ2mJSltarwtLlZeiHvnrGBVv8SA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1790550254; c=relaxed/simple; bh=NZbLfmxBfZfKRjbRrPyvbq4Qq4yD6ZI/QAV6pEeV35g=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=t9dSmXSjv/0cYqqvQEHP4kIkqcxKOW/cJgHAnyhbL+CwK6jt6DvRMr6vRYJFeG4uZu7XxuUeIPZBCqE4+U+AQ48kFElQvzjMRUrWV9HQt2vSjyICa3qb7/dZK5RDXgX77D5yIRDK8hk3Sjn/2wI9XCHZmcKvHe4QFssBkFk/A40= 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=DiUO0CDO; 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="DiUO0CDO" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1790550250; bh=Ey3nblPVLi95HVqMOtkgDFWMhJE1UXGcw24Uei1sjbs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=DiUO0CDO2u/SC77nsE6UYXInHFLtaSjcdQXCJciuGrqc9i7BxNqq7VM2tefBYQddP ppb0HRmoidyx7FiStQ5P9DjqC13v+m5eD2aCwtfcmHORNt0j8KNeq0//8cF0962W+D p7lUs1JXq0UyxgH7azbfncSNwcoLRbunG2i+uaduVWFkiP9dOcHdh8NN/3VBcw978O mEUnm0gQj5oYVZeb4QKFxhojY6xVO5GUtCWQmDZ2cXfko4AVdsAf2opeWHPHceTEHv VY+X8TxDZSv3xG1rJMMGBbSmm8IBGdGDfeIBv4xGfn1sfAG38YEyL7SQCNZIQM/qoy ObhSa8UzCgrJw== Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id D709260243; Mon, 28 Sep 2026 01:04:10 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2026 01:04:07 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: netdev-bot+sinfo@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-next 01/11] netfilter: synproxy: fix reset of ct seqadj when reopening a connection Message-ID: References: <20260927223436.269024-1-pablo@netfilter.org> <20260927223436.269024-2-pablo@netfilter.org> <179054884482.31693.9985445366421543993@kernel.org> 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: <179054884482.31693.9985445366421543993@kernel.org> Hi, On Sun, Sep 27, 2026 at 10:40:44PM +0000, netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org wrote: > Hi! > > This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its > commit messages seem to be missing some information: > > - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during > development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static > analysis tool scan. > > - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical > (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include > the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages. > > Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead, > reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers > can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for > other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages > then. > > The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think > that is the case please reply and explain. This are correctness fixes (no crashes to my knowledged, hence I decided to target net-next) as the cover letter specifies: Patch #1 TCP sequence tracking issue was reported by sashiko as the cover letter says. Patch #2 Just documentation update to fix incorrect information about the maximum number of expectations. Patch #3 Just a cleanup patch to remove a break; Patch #4 Just a cleanup, typos in comments. Patch #5 and #6 are the result of a human triggered review of the conntrack error stats by Phil Sutter, I think. Patch #7 is a preparation patch for #8. Patch #8 removes a unnecessary workqueue flush, submitter does not specify if it is visible in production, I suspect with a very large number of netns it must be. Author does not claim LLM assistance. Patch #9 is a fix triggered by sashiko report IIRC, I deemed it too large for net so I am routing this rework-fix to net-next. Patch #10 is a feature fix, IPv6 filtering does not work. I suspect it was found when trying to use this (broken) feature by the submitter. Patch #11 Ilya Maximets reports the CTA_ZONE filtering feature is not easy to infer from userspace, I don't think LLM triggered this, it looks more like an improvement to help userspace tools discover this feature. This is human written reply, my cover letter has been generated by me too to provide more context on these patches. Thanks!