Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 18 Jun 2022 09:36:16 +0200 | From | "Riccardo Paolo Bestetti" <> | Subject | Re: NEEDS FIXING - Was: Re: [PATCH v2] ipv4: ping: fix bind address validity check |
| |
On Sat Jun 18, 2022 at 4:58 AM CEST, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jun 2022 02:32:55 +0200 Riccardo Paolo Bestetti wrote: > > [...] > > 2) My patch is faulty. I had a complete and tested patch, including code > > fixing the regression. Instead of sending it, however, I decided to > > adapt it to preserve Carlos Llamas' version of ping.c, since they posted > > their patch first. In doing so I used a work branch which contained a > > faulty version (wrong flags) of the regression tests. The resulting > > faulty patch is, unfortunately, currently in the tree. > > > > At this point, due to the unfortunate combination of (1) and (2), it > > might be worth reverting the patch altogether and just applying the v1 > > (i.e. without the regression tests) to the tree and to the relevant LTS > > versions. > > IIUC only the test is faulty / unreliable, correct?
Correct, I don't see anything wrong with the fix itself. When manually tested it shows the intended behaviour (sorry for the long lines):
$ pwd $KERNEL_TREE/net/tools/testing/selftests/net
$ uname -a Linux enhorning 5.19.0-rc2kbr-00103-gb4a028c4d031 #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Fri Jun 17 13:51:24 CEST 2022 x86_64 GNU/Linux
$ ./nettest -s -D -P icmp -l 224.0.0.1 -b 09:19:50 server: error binding socket: 99: Cannot assign requested address
$ ./nettest -s -D -P icmp -l 255.255.255.255 -b 09:21:20 server: error binding socket: 99: Cannot assign requested address
(and fcnal-test.sh shows nothing noteworthy.)
Riccardo P. Bestetti
> > We have until Thursday before this patch hits Linus's tree so should > be plenty of time to figure the problem out and apply an incremental > fix. I see you posted an RFC already, thanks! > > > After that, a more proper discussion can be had about (1), and the > > regression tests can be fixed. I'm sending a demonstrative patch for > > that as a response to this message.
| |