netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net-loopback: set lo dev initial state to UP

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 9 Feb 2021 11:04:26 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     "Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार)" <maheshb@...gle.com>
Cc:     Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>,
        Jian Yang <jianyang.kernel@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jian Yang <jianyang@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net-loopback: set lo dev initial state to
 UP

On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 10:49:23 -0800 Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2021 at 8:23 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, 9 Feb 2021 12:54:59 +0100 Petr Machata wrote:  
> > > This will break user scripts, and it fact breaks kernel's very own
> > > selftest. We currently have this internally:
> > >
> > >     diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/fib_nexthops.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/fib_nexthops.sh
> > >     index 4c7d33618437..bf8ed24ab3ba 100755
> > >     --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/fib_nexthops.sh
> > >     +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/fib_nexthops.sh
> > >     @@ -121,8 +121,6 @@ create_ns()
> > >       set -e
> > >       ip netns add ${n}
> > >       ip netns set ${n} $((nsid++))
> > >     - ip -netns ${n} addr add 127.0.0.1/8 dev lo
> > >     - ip -netns ${n} link set lo up
> > >
> > >       ip netns exec ${n} sysctl -qw net.ipv4.ip_forward=1
> > >       ip netns exec ${n} sysctl -qw net.ipv4.fib_multipath_use_neigh=1
> > >
> > > This now fails because the ip commands are run within a "set -e" block,
> > > and kernel rejects addition of a duplicate address.  
> >
> > Thanks for the report, could you send a revert with this explanation?  
> Rather than revert, shouldn't we just fix the self-test in that regard?

The selftest is just a messenger. We all know Linus's stand on
regressions, IMO we can't make an honest argument that the change
does not break user space after it broke our own selftest. Maybe 
others disagree..