From: linuxtestproject.agent@gmail.com
To: Martin Doucha <mdoucha@suse.cz>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] lapi/xfrm.h: Include system XFRM header and force kernel IPv6 definition
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 13:04:26 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260527130426.4026-1-linuxtestproject.agent@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260527114708.16896-1-mdoucha@suse.cz>
Hi Martin,
On Wed, 27 May 2026, Martin Doucha wrote:
> [PATCH 1/6] lapi/xfrm.h: Include system XFRM header and force kernel IPv6 definition
The commit subject and the in-code comment contradict what the code actually
does. #define _UAPI_IPV6_H satisfies the include guard of linux/ipv6.h,
preventing that header from being pulled in — it does not "force" kernel IPv6
definitions. Both the subject and comment should be corrected.
> +/* Force use of kernel IPv6 definitions to avoid redefinition errors */
> +#define _UAPI_IPV6_H
> +#include <linux/xfrm.h>
Also needs a commit body explaining what specific redefinition error this
fixes. linux/ipv6.h contains struct ipv6hdr and friends; the struct in6_addr
redefinition that typically bites when mixing userspace and kernel IPv6 headers
comes from linux/in6.h (include guard: _UAPI_LINUX_IN6_H). Please confirm
that blocking linux/ipv6.h is sufficient and that the real conflict is not
coming from linux/in6.h, and document the reasoning in the commit message.
[...]
--- [PATCH 5/6] xfrm02: Configure xfrm using direct netlink request ---
> - ret = tst_cmd(xfrm_cmd, NULL, NULL, TST_CMD_PASS_RETVAL);
> - if (ret)
> - tst_brk(TBROK, "Failed to install xfrm ESP-in-TCP state");
> + ctx = NETLINK_CREATE_CONTEXT(NETLINK_XFRM);
The patch correctly removes .needs_cmds from xfrm01 after dropping the ip(8)
call, but the equivalent removal is missing from xfrm02:
.needs_cmds = (struct tst_cmd[]) {
{.cmd = "ip"},
{}
},
ip(8) is no longer invoked; drop .needs_cmds here too.
No linux-git tag for CVE-2026-46300. If a kernel fix commit exists, add one.
--- [PATCH 6/6] xfrm03: Configure xfrm using direct netlink request ---
Same stale .needs_cmds as patch 5/6 — xfrm03 still requires ip(8) in the
test descriptor even though it is no longer called.
---
Note:
The agent can sometimes produce false positives although often its
findings are genuine. If you find issues with the review, please
comment this email or ignore the suggestions.
Regards,
LTP AI Reviewer
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-27 13:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-27 11:47 [LTP] [PATCH 1/6] lapi/xfrm.h: Include system XFRM header and force kernel IPv6 definition Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 11:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/6] xfrm01: Use NETDEV_SET_STATE() to activate loopback Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 11:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/6] xfrm01: Configure xfrm using direct netlink request Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 11:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH 4/6] lapi/udp.h: Add fallback constant for ESP-in-TCP Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 11:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH 5/6] xfrm02: Configure xfrm using direct netlink request Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 11:47 ` [LTP] [PATCH 6/6] xfrm03: " Martin Doucha
2026-05-27 13:04 ` linuxtestproject.agent [this message]
2026-05-27 14:57 ` [LTP] lapi/xfrm.h: Include system XFRM header and force kernel IPv6 definition Martin Doucha
2026-06-01 6:52 ` Andrea Cervesato via ltp
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=20260527130426.4026-1-linuxtestproject.agent@gmail.com \
--to=linuxtestproject.agent@gmail.com \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
--cc=mdoucha@suse.cz \
/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