From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 617EB286426; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:03:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757001783; cv=none; b=Iufa/QBcHX+SUJLi+I4bN5aMWguXK4ZmAidNJxgaBswNKW8srO2MrnE5cZNv88JrR14tEVtAHfXbBl+kACKY6O7vtiHZFAGzKuV9msvBcoj0/K2U9JPw/73S1EHpUzNQjzRKI8QBHMrHs2a7cIx+pLB1yX5V3dpCzcVD3Tap8lI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757001783; c=relaxed/simple; bh=TenZFDl1fP03GOEayZNK8u5iDEN9dJ/DGI5jmc9gK8A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ccIRlmw+2Uxls5pzWDjWA9fLCv5u/INC6y8wBXO0+rJQIFTMbE2/2SRWXPIbAk2N29QYZbJwqXtBxvGn1773Ha/MmcrcR5cmDXIuCt+4cE5EucCHrESnpEtL3vUndJVzM19E9pS06ifMfpv0ULnBNCDA9UfRYNkbrUTwAOSU6N0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Ie6a77vf; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Ie6a77vf" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9DB18C4CEF1; Thu, 4 Sep 2025 16:03:02 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1757001783; bh=TenZFDl1fP03GOEayZNK8u5iDEN9dJ/DGI5jmc9gK8A=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Ie6a77vfe+eGDZBk/e9rreg2KsksttxfzJVc4u7iFWDeoypwL2xkiuQNlpg2fexPh 60YemD6+3d2gHI6QT2mYbBpKsLyPrK+RLSfmesgALG3KezXFDPupSdWANB6rgn+ZGh 8fzzcZLeGenbdsjV2NxgD2CXREYqKmmEJAGfzawX6eQw2RFxtD5xdwGaMUT6dk/BFA eGBEYxaRapvSixT9zBNQOlmQA5bFPtECZli+YmnheJ5tJQQste0acj2zcJ2gCUsnLy BjW8q9lwnqaiLKjdxOlBrhXhkuxd2jaRifzJULXMyQVK2La5GbVJk4CWpoeneKibsJ PMWgjPxXbfvGA== Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2025 09:03:01 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Maksimilijan Marosevic Cc: davem@davemloft.net, dsahern@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev, syzbot+a259a17220263c2d73fc@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] ipv6: Check AF_UNSPEC in ip6_route_multipath_add() Message-ID: <20250904090301.552ef178@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250804204233.1332529-1-maksimilijan.marosevic@proton.me> References: <20250804204233.1332529-1-maksimilijan.marosevic@proton.me> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel-mentees@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Mon, 04 Aug 2025 20:42:53 +0000 Maksimilijan Marosevic wrote: > This check was removed in commit e6f497955fb6 ("ipv6: Check GATEWAY > in rtm_to_fib6_multipath_config().") as part of rt6_qualify_for ecmp(). > The author correctly recognises that rt6_qualify_for_ecmp() returns > false if fb_nh_gw_family is set to AF_UNSPEC, but then mistakes > AF_UNSPEC for AF_INET6 when reasoning that the check is unnecessary. > This means certain malformed entries don't get caught in > ip6_route_multipath_add(). > > This patch reintroduces the AF_UNSPEC check while respecting changes > of the initial patch. Hi Maksimilijan! Are you planning to repost this with a test? If not I suppose we can enlist the author of the commit to help with the selftest..