On Wed, Oct 14, 2026 at 01:23:46PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote:
Florian Westphal [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Pablo Neira Ayuso [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
sashiko reports:
"If an IPv4 packet from an AF_INET socket is encapsulated by an IPv6 tunnel,
the tunnel preserves the AF_INET socket in skb->sk while transmitting the
outer IPv6 packet on the LOCAL_OUT path."
This sounds like an unrelated issue, I don't know yet how that can
happen TBH.
I'm stupid and I don't understand why this would be a regression.
This change makes things stricter, so it doesn't enable anything that
wasn't allowed before, how does this add a new crash regression? :-(
Please toss this patch. Lets ignore this problem.
I really think LLM is just getting confused, because the series
contains flowtable support for IPv4-over-IPv6 and vice-versa.
Then, the LLM tries to find the same pattern in the patches coming in
this PR batch !:-D