From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pz2-f12.google.com (mail-pz2-f12.google.com [74.125.228.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2901048593E for ; Fri, 18 Sep 2026 05:52:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.228.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789710775; cv=none; b=BSl7x45OQ4+chkLJ/1ybnHyMh8lQhjnoy6oLXg6PmvUQ9+I8M/Ks58UoGexr8OkFUWJMx9MSuUC+KB0fVuOXzFJ5x6r0Ch3GDNBN/wnfUD9rmXXRCzdx7An0Q89lPeZq6al+EJ0VSjF/hQ+hkEd5v38/eQdUlVL6wDIXKZ9txsw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789710775; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V99jLj2gEYsH462fTqhUwsqP0GqMQkk41b67V5dynz0=; h=Mime-Version:Content-Type:Date:Message-Id:Subject:From:To:Cc: References:In-Reply-To; b=JCL5NiezHYDu6hSKPbSqEaY+hRQfKm+lYEhTdEBAMCeqMdib1/IdKXMNZwbb1ntJoZw8FwJK97WAOeiofHajtMTC6GpxB2SCdnm/yuoNofkR7rpcJ9CbYfaP6IomU1DC7HdqsP2RapBm2uLD25CbBTlM8D7dphVD8vNa1Po+r58= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=LH1/Yndx; arc=none smtp.client-ip=74.125.228.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="LH1/Yndx" Received: by mail-pz2-f12.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-cc1cea4bfd1so185247a12.0 for ; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 22:52:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1789710773; x=1790315573; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:references:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:date :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to:content-type; bh=RoqQBX0V764x0A/v/amZwGuN9suY1fEbdmSCiYW1k5w=; b=LH1/YndxdKdTqJTRoOSlt0kiCmgEVtwTVWQ2dNzfDSEY9XCp7y4XkQQsRQsO5sGLdv u4MsRZUs9PrK9+cdV4t88JtvJCAHyKi7lNtx55zWSiC5jvb5+vGABqO1ZZumgYbJtFfJ hY4c6wdKEssCOyGYKh06SJaa/wuFCT8ZXM07tBmeEZ8bfCdXgVdRoxZk4hnY9hIbiwDQ KzveBiurcVwDtjShw5SNupSOCA/2HmuyCAD/Gc8sxGi23g7IZ1kBi4MTd8At3tM73xaK AAeJV9jgE6XlxjBVIofS387c2mof0UM1QiHLKWeCk3NUhc00RRKMxAcZyHpxohn3BaN7 XU9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20260707; t=1789710773; x=1790315573; h=in-reply-to:references:cc:to:from:subject:message-id:date :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:x-gm-gg :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to :content-type; bh=RoqQBX0V764x0A/v/amZwGuN9suY1fEbdmSCiYW1k5w=; b=ZAYJowmmvwu5F1VKG/5gkaS9pNMpjBaqkoaNMQWPd/6MWxkXjT4On45Kr1sw6WukQJ fGQs+xPsdq+a+/zDVmwviUMVcMCxgPF23DZRZWPaDTSyMEIy9bwBqpqS5BouPfviVgQp BIH+ba/KcGRs/3aQADXNotVsrt37PFV1mT2KqwBZl1H8xYtnbL9P91fdvYkd+YLz4Oam g3CRcG+2Ci3A5v3UUvv4c/63IWnWxA/cvzLGpuspSd8VWQhJDANjzSo6Wn5j3iRKciGX dhUfzGZeM1OuNGqsh2k/oAdoZE1LNiy1h4Fz3pszzwI7CqwPvra345AhMVFHTTVlfPXe EWJA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AKwUvBz8AKVME3H/Di0BoAm99qAnDGcWSt5tPZuog+mexo/DcGoiRfcpYLM7BkTHX4r9YqZr9GzqUPiDF/vS7s4=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AFuF++mx0nNsXJcz2SaNAGOy8gfpxjF+ZRXkae76EsYyikPGkQbYVL5y dpOpzmdMbK3lW7Pq+LYIvqTPeFT4g50KqIGIhD0xsTTLetnKGwgcF2Hq X-Gm-Gg: AYBFou2QPzj7Vh8Fcmhc8QvVG+KDJEGaoSXOntRFOvLXe4M1b/R4dhPZo0XJEC+y8Th 73pp8jVjnZwSn1d2/fqAmbsEaVPmIyzybioRozavJPw0fUeTmT/8pkD4V/EXeXsv95ikGhsNjK3 ytWthFncVvPQvSWTSqe2Eo8BY6RVUf/4s6EVp7PbF2rL4LPuclUXKKdnOTdEvMN7amS5guuxFik R646jekb6zoaRhUuQCPaChDqLm7ot8ryE6AHo62uh/eQ6kVZC58xMFXYtSFIdvVQrR5D3Q9C8LN ajyoXeRXy6KnoXwjQ3siFFBOackoD410m16iJE6gR6rHlPQyLw8sAplZGDhqdPLYIqqe+fHb6Fz wcte4ZUSY0m++fIT+Lz2pm//CM4/3Q1loFpbUNmqnvowG0Va3eEhSUX6UEnXWR6e+aN88vj1p60 FleXSH/3mTwxYBaHxyzrYk78v+C3g4rvKYJR0FpGYM8EE7BUVqjiLAkNOBgWh+Rz44U92b034Cc pcL5/DYr8iNDPpoUBvyn4vt8g== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:9e0f:b0:3dd:85a8:caca with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-3dd8c47d1c6mr2792351637.33.1789710773192; Thu, 17 Sep 2026 22:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([13.93.150.60]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5a478bee46e88-33c28721895sm1518873eec.13.2026.09.17.22.52.51 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Sep 2026 22:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 05:52:50 +0000 Message-Id: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/2] selftests: net: test untracked NA recovery of FAILED neighbors From: "Lawrence Lee" To: Cc: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , X-Mailer: aerc 0.17.0 References: <3f33052571409614b953a3dc7778114c51c43669.1789448374.git.lfqlee314@gmail.com> <178966456270.22033.8952247046783062389@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <178966456270.22033.8952247046783062389@kernel.org> > [Severity: Low] > Should verify_ndisc() also check the link-layer address that the > advertisement carried? > > The seed in test_unsolicited_na_common() deliberately creates the entry > without one: > > ${IP_ROUTER} neigh replace "${HOST_ADDR}" dev "${ROUTER_INTF}" \ > nud failed extern_learn > > while the recovery path in net/ipv6/ndisc.c:ndisc_recv_na() pulls the tar= get > link-layer address out of the options and passes it down: > > lladdr =3D ndisc_opt_addr_data(ndopts.nd_opts_tgt_lladdr, dev); > ... > __ndisc_update(dev, neigh, lladdr, > new_state, update_flags, neigh_failed, > NDISC_NEIGHBOUR_ADVERTISEMENT, &ndopts); > > Since the only assertions here are the state substring and extern_learn, > would a change that moves FAILED -> STALE but installs no lladdr, or an > incorrect one, still report OK? Comparing the resulting lladdr against t= he > host veth MAC would close that gap. > I will update the tests to verify the lladdr > [Severity: Low] > Can this switch actually isolate the mode 2 in-prefix gate? > > Moving HOST_ADDR from 2000:20::2 to 2000:21::2 changes the source address= of > the advertisement, its target address, and the key of the seeded neighbou= r > entry all at once, while the router keeps 2000:20::1/64. > > The advertisement under test comes from addrconf_dad_completed(), and > ndisc_send_na() uses the same address for both fields when it is local: > > net/ipv6/ndisc.c:ndisc_send_na() { > ifp =3D ipv6_get_ifaddr(dev_net(dev), solicited_addr, dev, 1); > if (ifp) { > src_addr =3D solicited_addr; > ... > .target =3D *solicited_addr, > } > > so saddr =3D=3D target for every packet this test generates. The kernel = gate is > source based: > > net/ipv6/ndisc.c:accept_untracked_na() { > case 2: > return !!ipv6_chk_prefix(saddr, idev->dev); > } > > and Documentation/networking/ip-sysctl.rst describes mode 2 in terms of "= the > source IP address". Would a change that tested msg->target instead of sa= ddr > leave both new mode 2 rows green? Keeping HOST_ADDR fixed and instead > varying the prefix configured on the router side would exercise the gate > without also moving the target and the entry key. > Will update the tests to cover one source address outside the prefix and=20 one inside. > [Severity: Medium] > The comment says "add a delay to ensure neighbour processing is done", bu= t > link_up, start_tcpdump and verify_ndisc run back to back with no sleep an= d no > retry. Where is the delay? > > start_tcpdump() blocks on: > > ${IP_ROUTER_EXEC} timeout 15s \ > tcpdump --immediate-mode -tpni ${ROUTER_INTF} -c 1 \ > "icmp6 && icmp6[0] =3D=3D 136 && src ${HOST_ADDR}" > > but the AF_PACKET tap that satisfies -c 1 is fed from ptype_all delivery = in > __netif_receive_skb_core(), which runs ahead of the state change the test > looks at: > > ipv6_rcv() -> icmpv6_rcv() -> ndisc_recv_na() -> __ndisc_update() -> > neigh_update() > > Does tcpdump exiting really order against that update, given verify_ndisc= () > takes a single un-retried snapshot of ip neigh show? > > There is a second effect for the new rows. In the four expect-FAILED=20 > cases: > > test_unsolicited_na_combination 0 0 1 failed > test_unsolicited_na_combination 0 1 0 failed > test_unsolicited_na_combination 1 1 1 failed > test_unsolicited_na_combination 0 2 1 failed 0 > > the expected value FAILED is exactly the state the entry was seeded with,= so > "still FAILED" and "the advertisement was never processed" look identical= . > Would a bounded poll for the expected state, or an explicit settle, make > these rows able to distinguish the two? > > Related question on ordering of the capture: tcpdump is started after > link_up, so can the single unsolicited advertisement emitted at DAD > completion be missed if the fork and exec are slow? In that case timeout > exits 124 while set -e is in effect inside start_tcpdump, which aborts th= e > whole script rather than failing one row. Would arming the capture befor= e > link_up avoid that? > Will change the tests to start the capture prior to bringing up the host=20 side