netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/9] selftests: hsr: Add ping test for PRP

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: <aXthMlr6Hpas1LBt@thinkpad>
Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 14:31:30 +0100
From: Felix Maurer <fmaurer@...hat.com>
To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
	jkarrenpalo@...il.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...nel.org,
	allison.henderson@...cle.com, petrm@...dia.com, antonio@...nvpn.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/9] selftests: hsr: Add ping test for PRP

On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 12:05:00PM +0100, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> On 2026-01-22 15:56:56 [+0100], Felix Maurer wrote:
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/hsr/prp_ping.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/hsr/prp_ping.sh
> > new file mode 100755
> > index 000000000000..fd2ba9f05d4c
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/hsr/prp_ping.sh
> …
> > +	# MAC addresses will be copied from LAN A interface
> > +	ip -net "$node1" link set address 00:11:22:00:00:01 dev vethA
> > +	ip -net "$node2" link set address 00:11:22:00:00:02 dev vethA
>
> so I somehow started this (I think) but while browsing the spec it
> somehow says that the same MAC address should be used on both ports.
> Could it be?
> It says that the two frames are identical except for the LAN field and
> checksum. Also the duplication is defined on src-MAC + seq nr.
> Having this requires to merge the two MACs for a node and we do this but
> could this be a left over from an older version of the spec or a
> behaviour that was not meant happen?

Yes, for PRP it is required that both ports, A and B, of a node send
with the same MAC. For us that means that the two ports need to be
configured with the same MAC address. This used to be a common source of
configuration errors. Therefore, b65999e7238e ("net: hsr: sync hw addr
of slave2 according to slave1 hw addr on PRP") made it so that we are
now copying the MAC from port A to port B.

Therefore, I'm only setting the MAC of vethA on each node in the test.
Even this is not strictly necessary but it turns out that debugging is a
lot simpler, when it is obvious addresses belong to which node.

Thanks,
   Felix