On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 01:30:05AM +0100, Alexandr Nedvedicky wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 09:59:21AM +0100, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > Currently we have one UDP table for both IPv4 and IPv6 PCB.
> > I would like to split it like Raw IP and divert tables.
> > 
> > Then we have less contention on the table mutex when IPv4 and IPv6
> > are used simultaneously.  Also individual hash tables get smaller
> > and looping over all PCBs gets shorter.
> > 
> > ok?
> 
>     change makes sense, I have no objection. I have one comment/question:
> 
> </snip>
> > @@ -847,10 +866,10 @@ udp6_ctlinput(int cmd, struct sockaddr *
> >  			 */
> >  		}
> >  
> > -		in6_pcbnotify(&udbtable, &sa6, uh.uh_dport,
> > +		in6_pcbnotify(&udb6table, &sa6, uh.uh_dport,
> >  		    &sa6_src, uh.uh_sport, rdomain, cmd, cmdarg, notify);
> >  	} else {
> > -		in6_pcbnotify(&udbtable, &sa6, 0,
> > +		in6_pcbnotify(&udb6table, &sa6, 0,
> >  		    &sa6_any, 0, rdomain, cmd, cmdarg, notify);
> >  	}
> >  }
> 
>     hunk above belongs to function udp6_ctlinput(). Are you sure
>     &udb6table address is correct in else branch? If I understand
>     things right the else branch matches condition !ip6, so
>     I would expect &udbtable here.

The ip6 is the header of the quoted IP packet within the ICMP6
packet.  If it was IP in ICMP6 the first branch is taken.

The else branch is called from pfctlinput() without ICMP6 payload.
But is it still IPv6, it is checked at start of udp6_ctlinput().

        if (sa == NULL)
                return;
        if (sa->sa_family != AF_INET6 ||
            sa->sa_len != sizeof(struct sockaddr_in6))
                return;

bluhm