Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757321Ab0GIPZE (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 11:25:04 -0400 Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:38848 "EHLO stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755169Ab0GIPZA (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Jul 2010 11:25:00 -0400 Message-ID: <4C373F48.8080504@trash.net> Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2010 17:24:56 +0200 From: Patrick McHardy User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.10) Gecko/20100621 Fedora/3.0.5-1.fc13 Thunderbird/3.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Simon Horman CC: lvs-devel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netfilter@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Malcolm Turnbull , Wensong Zhang , Julius Volz , "David S. Miller" , Hannes Eder Subject: Re: [patch v2.3 3/4] IPVS: make FTP work with full NAT support References: <20100704113246.562399500@vergenet.net> <20100704114808.932594876@vergenet.net> <4C3316F0.2030807@trash.net> <20100707065324.GC20424@verge.net.au> In-Reply-To: <20100707065324.GC20424@verge.net.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1673 Lines: 44 Am 07.07.2010 08:53, schrieb Simon Horman: > On Tue, Jul 06, 2010 at 01:43:44PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote: >> Simon Horman wrote: >>> @@ -219,19 +358,23 @@ static int ip_vs_ftp_out(struct ip_vs_ap >>> buf_len = strlen(buf); >>> + ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo); >>> + ret = nf_nat_mangle_tcp_packet(skb, >>> + ct, >>> + ctinfo, >>> + start-data, >>> + end-start, >>> + buf, >>> + buf_len); >>> + >>> + if (ct && ct != &nf_conntrack_untracked) >> This does not make sense, you're already using the conntrack above >> in the call to nf_nat_mangle_tcp_packet(), so the check should >> probably happen before that. You also should be checking the >> return value of nf_nat_mangle_tcp_packet() before setting up the >> expectation. >> >>> + ip_vs_expect_related(skb, ct, n_cp, >>> + IPPROTO_TCP, NULL, 0); > > Good point. Is this better? > > ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo); > if (ct && !nf_ct_is_untracked()) { > ret = nf_nat_mangle_tcp_packet(skb, ct, ctinfo, > start-data, end-start, > buf, buf_len); > if (ret) > ip_vs_expect_related(skb, ct, n_cp, > IPPROTO_TCP, NULL, 0); Yes, that's better, although we're usually dropping packets when mangling fails. This can only happen under memory pressure, the assumption is that we might be able to properly mangle the packet when it is retransmitted. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/