netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 10/12] selftests/bpf: Create established sockets in socket iterator tests

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4hymd6ivknwleq7fvdicod6fdnbtlf3fqwkbjadfg5dsumfhcz@7gdrkdbocywe>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 18:25:46 -0700
From: Jordan Rife <jordan@...fe.io>
To: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 bpf-next 10/12] selftests/bpf: Create established
 sockets in socket iterator tests

> > +		i++;
> > +		established_socks[i] = accept_from_one(server_fds,
> > +						       server_fds_len);
> 
> I am not sure the final ack is always received by the server at this point.
> If not, the test could be flaky. Is this case possible? and is it better to
> poll/select for a fixed number of seconds?

Fair point. It definitely seems like a potential source of flakiness.
Using poll with a timeout sounds reasonable to me. I think this
eliminates the need for setting the O_NONBLOCK flag as well, which is
nice. I'll make some adjustments and send out another version.

Thanks for catching this!

Jordan