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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 12:31:38 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Rai, Anjali" <anjali.rai@...el.com>, Kuniyuki Iwashima
 <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "joannelkoong@...il.com"
 <joannelkoong@...il.com>, "regressions@...ts.linux.dev"
 <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>, "stable@...r.kernel.org"
 <stable@...r.kernel.org>, "Gandhi, Jinen" <jinen.gandhi@...el.com>, "Qin,
 Kailun" <kailun.qin@...el.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org"
 <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Regression Issue

On Mon, 8 May 2023 08:27:49 +0000 Rai, Anjali wrote:
> On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 07:33:58AM +0000, Rai, Anjali wrote:
>>> > We have one test which test the functionality of "using the same 
>>> > loopback address and port for both IPV6 and IPV4", The test should 
>>> > result in EADDRINUSE for binding IPv4 to same port, but it was 
>>> > successful
>>> > 
>>> > Test Description:
>>> > The test creates sockets for both IPv4 and IPv6, and forces IPV6 to 
>>> > listen for both IPV4 and IPV6 connections; this in turn makes binding 
>>> > another (IPV4) socket on the same port meaningless and results in 
>>> > -EADDRINUSE
>>> > 
>>> > Our systems had Kernel v6.0.9 and the test was successfully executing, we recently upgraded our systems to v6.2, and we saw this as a failure. The systems which are not upgraded, there it is still passing.
>>> > 
>>> > We don't exactly at which point this test broke, but our assumption is
>>> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/28044fc1d4953b07acec0da4d2fc4
>>> > 784c57ea6fb  
>>> 
>>> Is there a specific reason you did not add cc: for the authors of that commit?
>>> 
>>> > Can you please check on your end whether this is an actual regression of a feature request.  
>>>
>>> If you revert that commit, does it resolve the issue?  Have you worked with the Intel networking developers to help debug this further?

> > I am part of Gramine OpenSource Project, I don't know someone from
> > Intel Networking developers team, if you know someone, please feel
> > free to add them.
> > 
> > Building completely linux source code and trying with different
> > commits, I will not be able to do it today, I can check that may be
> > tomorrow or day after. 
>
> The C code was passing earlier, and output was " test completed
> successfully" but now with v6.2 it is failing and returning
> "bind(ipv4) was successful even though there is no IPV6_V6ONLY on
> same port\n"

Adding the mailing list and the experts. Cleaning up the quoting,
please don't top post going forward.

Kuniyuki, have we seen this before?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ