Re: [6.6.x REGRESSION][BISECTED] dev_snmp6: broken Ip6OutOctets accounting for forwarded IPv6 packets

[David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>]

On 1/25/24 8:08 AM, Vitezslav Samel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 25, 2024 at 07:47:40 +0100, Vitezslav Samel wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 24, 2024 at 17:46:52 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> On Thu, 25 Jan 2024 08:37:11 +0800 heng guo wrote:
>>>>>> Heng Guo, David, any thoughts on this? Revert?  
>>>>> Revert is best; Heng Guo can revisit the math and try again.
>>>>>
>>>>> The patch in question basically negated IPSTATS_MIB_OUTOCTETS; I see it
>>>>> shown in proc but never bumped in the datapath.  
>>>> [HG]: Yes please revert it. I verified the patch on ipv4, seems I should 
>>>> not touch the codes to ipv6. Sorry for it.
>>>
>>> Would you mind sending a patch with a revert, explaining the situation,
>>> the right Fixes tag and a link to Vitezslav's report?
>>
>>   I took a look at current master and found that there is yet another
>> commit since 6.6.x which touches this area: commit b4a11b2033b7 by Heng Guo
>> ("net: fix IPSTATS_MIB_OUTPKGS increment in OutForwDatagrams"). It went
>> in v6.7-rc1.
>>
>>   I will test current master this afternoon and report back.
> 
>   Test 1: Linus' current master: IPv6 octets accounting is OK
>   Test 2: 6.6.13 with b4a11b2033b7 ("net: fix IPSTATS_MIB_OUTPKGS
>           increment in OutForwDatagrams") on top is also OK.
> 
>   Seems like my problem was solved in master already, but
> it still exists in 6.6.y. IMHO commit b4a11b2033b7 should be
> marked as for-stable-6.6.y and forwarded to GregKH. AFAIK only 6.6.y
> stable tree is affected.
> 
>   But beware: I only tested my specific problem and I don't know if the
> commit with fix doesn't break anything else.

Only reported problem, so with b4a11b2033b7 backported to stable we
should be good. Thanks for the testing of various releases to isolate
the problem.