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 1C652224AE0; Sat, 7 Mar 2026 00:15:08 +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=1772842510; cv=none; b=u1DF8b++9R/tItxWhIik6uoqCJWLgW+y58xcrSjG3w86OslsPdOXMW1PynxS4iJIJJXpLu7oWuzg/9Sa5cXDEr7H9ghgQGBA14/3+Fh63o16C0HGctSPzIFkLGO0yUBfmnlVub4VhowpVC+CszGFs2p9ApTOxxTKyJxchEYcxec= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1772842510; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tyt15WTiWzm1Uv5lOWMyzVaiGS0ThibnesyQLzVTAps=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=gxdvcLCC9xYW7EE4/JTeRaAXeAP+UQWuX2oqPydob/PVBmerK4QzWL5XMYpRlSo18/jue1mqRWUxFWZdmfk2N9dEy/0S/jobRZ9jC3HPXdXV1WxAEvF4e2VIpC79mzkTozu61CjUWgyx1lFqdBY99yBghOP332brcZj2HniSSS4= 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=YrzAPgHH; 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="YrzAPgHH" Received: from netfilter.org (mail-agni [217.70.190.124]) by mail.netfilter.org (Postfix) with UTF8SMTPSA id 2C9E0602D6; Sat, 7 Mar 2026 01:15:07 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=netfilter.org; s=2025; t=1772842507; bh=y7jvae0QcNT4vmZ6m7HGWHRDoljbbht95hV4A1EgJQ0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=YrzAPgHH9kbo6vldrAZnlpWZGRgwQDv2mb2omyvyQIB/IC+nGYsmtQduGUS4MvED5 u4ss2HGfY/F8xdBPjaWYqvBbS/o9Lt+6gfw+mLIZJQyO6EEIFv5Uvp5CGDx99ALp5x Am32MypFJdUWN/LzCJE5yb6RHxRHYi/CzK9FHSfHwv8o/aEwFUYOhQSxVwV5DPLDwR CeN+xM2fg5F4LFL/aDtDE/uL/OEUvpKdj4y0S8pWRnhqbVjBLd9Z2E2VmHuqVj9YOM iyegofiel/VG0ldMrTx9enEve0/ZTP2Iene+B2RegZOpgqe0ZFFugiVBXPg6JHJ8i+ bxhBXiHuNu5aw== Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2026 01:15:04 +0100 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Chris Arges Cc: Florian Westphal , stable@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Greg Kroah-Hartman , lwn@lwn.net, jslaby@suse.cz, kernel-team@cloudflare.com, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [REGRESSION] 6.18.14 netfilter/nftables consumes way more memory Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: stable@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: On Fri, Mar 06, 2026 at 12:20:16PM -0600, Chris Arges wrote: > On 2026-03-06 13:25:44, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > > I see what is going on, my resize logic is not correct. This is > > > increasing the size for each new transaction, then the array is > > > getting larger and larger on each transaction update. > > > > > > Could you please give a try to this patch? > > > > Scratch that. > > > > Please, give a try to this patch. > > > > Thanks. > > Pablo, > > Thanks, I'm getting this set up on a few machines. I will have: > - 6.18.15 (original kernel version that repo'd the issue for us) > - 6.18.15 + this patch > - 6.18.15 + revert rbtree patchseries > > I'll compare memory usage with those 3 variants and give a response. I posted a new patch version, see: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netfilter-devel/patch/20260307001124.2897063-1-pablo@netfilter.org/