# Re: \[PATCH bpf-next 07/10\] bpf: Add helpers to query conntrack info

- From: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen \<hidden\>
- Date: 2021-10-20 09:48:31 
- List: netdev
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2021/10/7782644
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/netdev/2021/10/7782602/t.md

```text
Florian Westphal [ref] writes:

> Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [ref] wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 19, 2021 at 08:16:52PM IST, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
>> > The new helpers (bpf_ct_lookup_tcp and bpf_ct_lookup_udp) allow to query
>> > connection tracking information of TCP and UDP connections based on
>> > source and destination IP address and port. The helper returns a pointer
>> > to struct nf_conn (if the conntrack entry was found), which needs to be
>> > released with bpf_ct_release.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <redacted>
>> > Reviewed-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@nvidia.com>
>> 
>> The last discussion on this [0] suggested that stable BPF helpers for conntrack
>> were not desired, hence the recent series [1] to extend kfunc support to modules
>> and base the conntrack work on top of it, which I'm working on now (supporting
>> both CT lookup and insert).
>
> This will sabotage netfilter pipeline and the way things work more and
> more 8-(

Why?

> If you want to use netfilter with ebpf, please have a look at the RFC
> I posted and lets work on adding a netfilter specific program type
> that can run ebpf programs directly from any of the existing netfilter
> hook points.

Accelerating netfilter using BPF is a worthy goal in itself, but I also
think having the ability to lookup into conntrack from XDP is useful for
cases where someone wants to bypass the stack entirely (for accelerating
packet forwarding, say). I don't think these goals are in conflict
either, what makes you say they are?

-Toke

```