Re: [PATCH net-next 01/11] netfilter: synproxy: fix reset of ct seqadj when reopening a connection

Hi,

On Sun, Sep 27, 2026 at 10:40:44PM +0000, netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org wrote:

Hi!

This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its
commit messages seem to be missing some information:

 - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during
   development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static
   analysis tool scan.

 - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical
   (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include
   the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages.

Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead,
reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers
can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for
other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages
then.

The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think
that is the case please reply and explain.

This are correctness fixes (no crashes to my knowledged, hence I
decided to target net-next) as the cover letter specifies:

Patch #1 TCP sequence tracking issue was reported by sashiko as the
         cover letter says.

Patch #2 Just documentation update to fix incorrect information
         about the maximum number of expectations.

Patch #3 Just a cleanup patch to remove a break;

Patch #4 Just a cleanup, typos in comments.

Patch #5 and #6 are the result of a human triggered review of the
         conntrack error stats by Phil Sutter, I think.

Patch #7 is a preparation patch for #8.

Patch #8 removes a unnecessary workqueue flush, submitter does not
         specify if it is visible in production, I suspect with
         a very large number of netns it must be. Author does not
         claim LLM assistance.

Patch #9 is a fix triggered by sashiko report IIRC, I deemed it too
         large for net so I am routing this rework-fix to net-next.

Patch #10 is a feature fix, IPv6 filtering does not work.
          I suspect it was found when trying to use this (broken)
          feature by the submitter.

Patch #11 Ilya Maximets reports the CTA_ZONE filtering feature is
          not easy to infer from userspace, I don't think LLM
          triggered this, it looks more like an improvement to help
          userspace tools discover this feature.

This is human written reply, my cover letter has been generated by me
too to provide more context on these patches.

Thanks!