Linux Kernel Selftest development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: pablo@netfilter.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, phil@nwl.cc,
	shuah@kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org,
	coreteam@netfilter.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH nf-next] selftests: netfilter: nft_queue.sh: only queue icmp echo request/reply
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2026 08:24:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aq4qtFAKULch5dTl@strlen.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260918183109.3918131-1-kuba@kernel.org>

Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
> The bridge test flakes on debug kernels:
> 
>   FAIL: Expected 10 packets total, but got 24 packets total
>   hook 3 packets 00000008
>   hook 4 packets 00000010
> 
> The surplus are icmp fragment reassembly timeouts.  The udp flood in the
> stress test leaves incomplete datagrams behind in ns2 and ns3, 30 seconds
> later their reassembly queues expire and both namespaces send icmp time
> exceeded to ns1's pre-bridge address.  ns3 is not reconfigured when the
> router is turned into a bridge, so its messages arrive via veth2 and are
> then forwarded out of br0. Such packets are locally originated from the
> bridge point of view and are queued from the bridge output and
> postrouting hooks, which is why only those two counters are off.
> 
> Restrict the ipv4 rule to echo request/reply, the icmpv6 rule already
> does this.
> 
> We used to see 1 flake a day in NIPA before locally queuing this change,
> zero flakes since (over 9 days)

Thanks for debugging and fixing this!

Reviewed-by: Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>

> The difference between v4 and v6 has been there from day one,
> which makes it seem intentional, but I don't understand nft
> well enough to come up with any theories why..

Without the restriction this would also queue IPv6 neighbour
discovery messages.

ARP is not seen by NFPROTO_IPV4 hooks, so the restriction
was not needed. I simply did not think of icmp reassembly
timeout errors getting sent after some time when I wrote
this.

      reply	other threads:[~2026-09-19  6:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-18 18:31 [PATCH nf-next] selftests: netfilter: nft_queue.sh: only queue icmp echo request/reply Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-19  6:24 ` Florian Westphal [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=aq4qtFAKULch5dTl@strlen.de \
    --to=fw@strlen.de \
    --cc=coreteam@netfilter.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pablo@netfilter.org \
    --cc=phil@nwl.cc \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox