From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Vorel Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:36:15 +0200 Subject: [LTP] [PATCH] network/mpls: sleep 1 after setup in mpls02 In-Reply-To: <8d93deac-eec1-5f87-57a5-c72b2f6e5973@bell-sw.com> References: <410b2b2d-9633-7a57-527a-1663afe5f631@bell-sw.com> <0acf816462d49d8a6004c87e36b05d1b@suse.de> <8d93deac-eec1-5f87-57a5-c72b2f6e5973@bell-sw.com> Message-ID: List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: ltp@lists.linux.it > On 09.09.2021 18:53, pvorel wrote: > > Hi Su, Alexey, > > On 2021-08-30 11:26, suy.fnst@fujitsu.com wrote: > >> Hi, > >> ? I found that it's indeed related to ipv6 DAD as you said. > >> Calling > >> `ip netns exec ltp_ns sysctl -n net.ipv6.conf.ltp_ns_veth1.accept_dad=0` > >> or tst_wait_ipv6_dad() at end of the setup both solves the problem. > >> However there is one super strange part that the tentative address is > >> the local link adress of the ltp_ns_veth1: > >> 5: ltp_ns_veth1@if4: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue > >> state UP group default qlen 1000 > >> ??? link/ether f2:8f:24:d4:ba:26 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff link-netnsid 0 > >> ??? inet 10.0.0.1/24 scope global ltp_ns_veth1 > >> ?????? valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> ??? inet6 fd00:1:1:1::1/64 scope global nodad > >> ?????? valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> ??? inet6 fe80::f08f:24ff:fed4:ba26/64 scope link tentative > >> <------------------- > >> ?????? valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> However, there is no place using the address in mpls02 test.>> It makes me wonder how could it be possible to trigger the issue.. > Looks like the problem here in the neighbor discovery of fd00:1:1:1::2 > using link-local address, and vice verse for the other side. mpls is > using the following route with the address: > fd00:23::2 encap mpls 60 via fd00:1:1:1::2 dev ltp_ns_veth1 metric 1024 pref medium > so the address there should be in a reachable state... Thanks for info! I wonder if it's a bug in mpls or elsewhere. WDYT? > Adding it manually in setup might fix the test as well: > ROD ip neigh replace $(tst_ipaddr rhost) lladdr $(tst_hwaddr rhost) dev $(tst_iface) nud reachable > tst_rhost_run -s -c "ip neigh replace $(tst_ipaddr) lladdr $(tst_hwaddr) dev $(tst_iface rhost) nud reachable" > > I wonder if test still needs be fixed to work on all setups. > I think we could set accept_dad to 0 in generic setup of the > test interfaces, in tst_net.sh/tst_init_iface(). Unless it's a bug we'd hide by setting it, I'd be for this general solution. It'd be nice to get it fixed before release. Kind regards, Petr From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 722E0C433F5 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from picard.linux.it (picard.linux.it [213.254.12.146]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D5D7611B0 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:32 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 6D5D7611B0 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=suse.cz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.linux.it Received: from picard.linux.it (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTP id 936383C8C72 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:36:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (in-5.smtp.seeweb.it [217.194.8.5]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by picard.linux.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D5023C2195 for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:36:20 +0200 (CEST) Received: from smtp-out1.suse.de (smtp-out1.suse.de [195.135.220.28]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by in-5.smtp.seeweb.it (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 509A160140E for ; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:36:18 +0200 (CEST) Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by smtp-out1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44BE722427; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:18 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_rsa; t=1631266578; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9OJi27+mV4UBiqnKi/I6G7zm6peZdOmg22yAv27b7Bs=; b=JzPm+h4JlCQNSY6h82e9/BxJoMz37TuRqdMWusXJHDfObY/dWurzLrXmHXr1NEpTzVAvDB 2mPd3JUDYAgqR+eULb8kgYEI3CU0zhZAIXXflBpnoHloLRCpP9aMz5YfKbXJ583y4b7spL CldtgKzUSxsPh00pu62PE/BPfaXh1tk= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=suse.cz; s=susede2_ed25519; t=1631266578; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:date:date:message-id:message-id:to:to: cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=9OJi27+mV4UBiqnKi/I6G7zm6peZdOmg22yAv27b7Bs=; b=rH3/CMjdKLSlYyHlw6D53zBDmo1hH9MUMhb+gc/jjfFtdho6YZaXlTqGSU7t+4gxlUevEt hmEWgcI5uhoyTDBw== Received: from imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de [192.168.254.74]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-521) server-digest SHA512) (No client certificate requested) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ED11413D1D; Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from dovecot-director2.suse.de ([192.168.254.65]) by imap2.suse-dmz.suse.de with ESMTPSA id v6iONxEnO2G/dwAAMHmgww (envelope-from ); Fri, 10 Sep 2021 09:36:17 +0000 Date: Fri, 10 Sep 2021 11:36:15 +0200 From: Petr Vorel To: Alexey Kodanev Message-ID: References: <410b2b2d-9633-7a57-527a-1663afe5f631@bell-sw.com> <0acf816462d49d8a6004c87e36b05d1b@suse.de> <8d93deac-eec1-5f87-57a5-c72b2f6e5973@bell-sw.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8d93deac-eec1-5f87-57a5-c72b2f6e5973@bell-sw.com> X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.102.4 at in-5.smtp.seeweb.it X-Virus-Status: Clean Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH] network/mpls: sleep 1 after setup in mpls02 X-BeenThere: ltp@lists.linux.it X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux Test Project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Petr Vorel Cc: pvorel , suy.fnst@fujitsu.com, ltp@lists.linux.it Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-2" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Errors-To: ltp-bounces+ltp=archiver.kernel.org@lists.linux.it Sender: "ltp" Message-ID: <20210910093615.JkDhxDDr57JkchVKTcR59_HofV6ZGpyg0RLf_SuITXA@z> > On 09.09.2021 18:53, pvorel wrote: > > Hi Su, Alexey, > > On 2021-08-30 11:26, suy.fnst@fujitsu.com wrote: > >> Hi, > >> =A0 I found that it's indeed related to ipv6 DAD as you said. > >> Calling > >> `ip netns exec ltp_ns sysctl -n net.ipv6.conf.ltp_ns_veth1.accept_dad= =3D0` > >> or tst_wait_ipv6_dad() at end of the setup both solves the problem. > >> However there is one super strange part that the tentative address is > >> the local link adress of the ltp_ns_veth1: > >> 5: ltp_ns_veth1@if4: mtu 1500 qdisc noqueue > >> state UP group default qlen 1000 > >> =A0=A0=A0 link/ether f2:8f:24:d4:ba:26 brd ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff link-netn= sid 0 > >> =A0=A0=A0 inet 10.0.0.1/24 scope global ltp_ns_veth1 > >> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> =A0=A0=A0 inet6 fd00:1:1:1::1/64 scope global nodad > >> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> =A0=A0=A0 inet6 fe80::f08f:24ff:fed4:ba26/64 scope link tentative > >> <------------------- > >> =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 valid_lft forever preferred_lft forever > >> However, there is no place using the address in mpls02 test.>> It make= s me wonder how could it be possible to trigger the issue.. > Looks like the problem here in the neighbor discovery of fd00:1:1:1::2 > using link-local address, and vice verse for the other side. mpls is > using the following route with the address: > fd00:23::2 encap mpls 60 via fd00:1:1:1::2 dev ltp_ns_veth1 metric 1024= pref medium > so the address there should be in a reachable state... Thanks for info! I wonder if it's a bug in mpls or elsewhere. WDYT? > Adding it manually in setup might fix the test as well: > ROD ip neigh replace $(tst_ipaddr rhost) lladdr $(tst_hwaddr rhost) dev $= (tst_iface) nud reachable > tst_rhost_run -s -c "ip neigh replace $(tst_ipaddr) lladdr $(tst_hwaddr) = dev $(tst_iface rhost) nud reachable" > > I wonder if test still needs be fixed to work on all setups. > I think we could set accept_dad to 0 in generic setup of the > test interfaces, in tst_net.sh/tst_init_iface(). Unless it's a bug we'd hide by setting it, I'd be for this general solution. It'd be nice to get it fixed before release. Kind regards, Petr -- = Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp