From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [IPv6:2a0f:8001:1:32::40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27DB21FF0B3 for ; Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:03:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 021DC213BC; Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:03:11 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Lamprecht To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, Hannes Laimer Subject: applied: [PATCH pve-kernel] fix #8217: cherry-pick fix for flowtable vlan packets being untagged Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2026 16:02:56 +0100 Message-ID: <179319977473.1358349.16326462313899768480.b4-ty@b4> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.3 In-Reply-To: <20261027142306.3245660-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> References: <20261027142306.3245660-1-h.laimer@proxmox.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1793199783054 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.497 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: 2FLBF4IMAGMGSH5SFRS3OUQSNBI6EZU7 X-Message-ID-Hash: 2FLBF4IMAGMGSH5SFRS3OUQSNBI6EZU7 X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Tue, 27 Oct 2026 15:23:06 +0100, Hannes Laimer wrote: > The problem was that after the walk to construct the flowtable entry > it was possible that only part of the constructed entry was copied > into the table. Namely when the egress device the walk discovered in > its chain was not in the set of devices for the flowtable. That > resulted in the entry construction failing half way through, but the > egress being set. That led to a flowtable entry for a vlan device that > had its egress set, but missed the step to set the tag in its entry. > > [...] Applied, thanks! [1/1] fix #8217: cherry-pick fix for flowtable vlan packets being untagged commit: 80c6388d3f54ac35bf6e30ad39fb620270a392c1