From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
To: AnishMulay <anishm7030@gmail.com>
Cc: pimyn@google.com, dsahern@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
horms@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
syzbot+ded267b328e950a7c0c4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: addrconf: drop "BUG: " prefix from pr_warn()
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:56:55 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260909115655.GA1344764@shredder> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260908043143.120335-1-anishm7030@gmail.com>
On Tue, Sep 08, 2026 at 12:31:43AM -0400, AnishMulay wrote:
> Hi Ido,
>
> I ran into this same warning independently (different syzbot report,
> address 2001::fb rather than fc00::, extid 57f410c9a4f8d7a441d6) and
> ended up tracing it down before finding this thread.
>
> The mechanism in my case: keep_addr_on_down is set, addrconf_ifdown()
> clears ifp->rt and deletes the route for the kept address but skips
> its notifier. On the following up, fixup_permanent_addr() allocates a
> new fib6_info and schedules addrconf_dad_work asynchronously instead
> of inserting the route itself. If a second addrconf_ifdown() for the
> same device runs before that work item gets to execute (I see this
> happen within a single "ip link set lo up" call, which drives both a
> NETDEV_UP and a NETDEV_CHANGE through addrconf_notify()), the fresh
> route gets torn down again with no notifier to re-arm anything. The
> work item then runs with ifp->rt NULL and nothing left to insert.
>
> I have a patch that regenerates the route at that point instead of
> only warning, verified against a C reproducer translated from the
> syzbot repro (no warning, and the /128 route is present after the
> down/up cycle, across repeated runs). Since you mentioned you were
> looking into avoiding this state, I wanted to check before sending it,
> in case you already have something further along or a different angle
> on it. Happy to send what I have either way.
Does your reproducer rely on both keep_addr_on_down being set on the
loopback device and its MTU going below 1280?
The loopback device retains global addresses when this happens, unlike
any other device:
# sysctl -wq net.ipv6.conf.lo.keep_addr_on_down=1
# ip -6 address add 2001:db8:1::1/64 dev lo
# ip link set dev lo mtu 1000
# ip -6 address show dev lo
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1000 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
inet6 2001:db8:1::1/64 scope global tentative
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
# ip link add name dummy1 up type dummy
# sysctl -wq net.ipv6.conf.dummy1.keep_addr_on_down=1
# ip -6 address add 2001:db8:2::1/64 dev dummy1
# ip link set dev dummy1 mtu 1000
# ip -6 address show dev dummy1
And the local address (::1) is not restored when the MTU goes above the
minimum IPv6 MTU:
# ip link set dev lo mtu 2000
# ip -6 address show dev lo
1: lo: <LOOPBACK,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 2000 qdisc noqueue state UNKNOWN group default qlen 1000
inet6 2001:db8:1::1/64 scope global tentative
valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever
So, given that this state is quite broken and unlikely to be used by
anyone other than fuzzers, I would like to simply align the loopback
behavior with other devices and avoid keeping its addresses when the MTU
goes below the minimum:
diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
index 9d89be7e0544..2f7c872421b6 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c
@@ -3908,9 +3908,12 @@ static int addrconf_ifdown(struct net_device *dev, bool unregister)
}
/* combine the user config with event to determine if permanent
- * addresses are to be removed from address hash table
+ * addresses are to be removed from address hash table. IPv6 cannot
+ * operate below IPV6_MIN_MTU, so treat that like disable_ipv6 and do
+ * not keep addresses without their host routes.
*/
- if (!unregister && !idev->cnf.disable_ipv6) {
+ if (!unregister && !idev->cnf.disable_ipv6 &&
+ dev->mtu >= IPV6_MIN_MTU) {
/* aggregate the system setting and interface setting */
int _keep_addr = READ_ONCE(net->ipv6.devconf_all->keep_addr_on_down);
Regenerating the route in this case is more complexity for a case that
nobody is hitting other than fuzzers.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-09 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-07 13:13 Pimyn Girgis
2026-08-10 9:51 ` Ido Schimmel
2026-08-10 8:54 ` Pimyn Girgis
2026-08-10 10:40 ` Ido Schimmel
2026-09-08 4:31 ` AnishMulay
2026-09-09 11:56 ` Ido Schimmel [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260909115655.GA1344764@shredder \
--to=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=anishm7030@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=pimyn@google.com \
--cc=syzbot+ded267b328e950a7c0c4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®