netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net/selftests: TCP-AO selftests updates

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]

Message-ID: <CAJwJo6b1UHoCuyzy4UnLRu1W-GWx5jM2RhoddbzzuWXaEVG5yA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2024 01:50:19 +0100
From: Dmitry Safonov <0x7f454c46@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Dmitry Safonov via B4 Relay <devnull+0x7f454c46.gmail.com@...nel.org>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, 
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, 
	Mohammad Nassiri <mnassiri@...na.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/7] net/selftests: TCP-AO selftests updates

Hi Jakub,

On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 16:18, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 02 Aug 2024 10:23:24 +0100 Dmitry Safonov via B4 Relay wrote:
> > First 4 patches are more-or-less cleanups/preparations.
> >
> > Patch 5 was sent to me/contributed off-list by Mohammad, who wants 32-bit
> > kernels to run TCP-AO.
> >
> > Patch 6 is a workaround/fix for slow VMs. Albeit, I can't reproduce
> > the issue, but I hope it will fix netdev flakes for connect-deny-*
> > tests.
>
> Hm, could be a coincidence but we did hit:
>
> # not ok 55 # error 381[unsigned-md5.c:24] Failed to add a VRF: -17
> # not ok 56 # error 383[unsigned-md5.c:33] Failed to add a route to VRF: -22: Key was rejected by service
>
> https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710001/4-unsigned-md5-ipv6/stdout

Yeah, I think I've seen that previously on netdev as well, but quite rarely.
Let me take a look and see why adding a VRF table sometimes fails with EEXIST.

> in the first run after this got queued. But the retry worked:
>
> https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710001/4-unsigned-md5-ipv6-retry/stdout
>
> 🤷️

[from another email]
> oooh another run, another (different) flake:
> https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710181/11-key-management-ipv4/stdout

Yeah, this is related to this very patch set.
Some more work clearly needed :-)

Thanks,
             Dmitry