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 EB24E487BE; Tue, 19 Aug 2025 01:30:13 +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=1755567014; cv=none; b=KW73s4UMXIIwTkxEJFnBCil4KWhpAENQcCTcusRSIXS7NLENpspA75k44RXfRxCZkCXC4+s15HCshRfneL74OiJL388Cih9e7w3TC3kDsgprseuuN0whFV+6exB0C1siRCHeMtB3gUnOoZfPq2UNU86aq7uaOC9lkrBadh8apxo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1755567014; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HjSo4sMUl2Ldpf1msP/byAnFpczRUW9sFjAhNUFqEsY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=aiYlZ3BOpJ3NQcASjBBsYXPzBd86rXk3pBzT6kk1x4/UNkuDbAaklGaJC1IH1LQ2UTs4DeYC5NElFQsUPxHpGM+tlxnIAG1T1PiuVBOJY8WXJkMvTQPbMHFikGBLEOgqGFvTOUB5b1JHDtto3evzY8dR6KI2zCAzXq114EybxTo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=KDAuBa+I; 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="KDAuBa+I" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 22353C113D0; Tue, 19 Aug 2025 01:30:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1755567013; bh=HjSo4sMUl2Ldpf1msP/byAnFpczRUW9sFjAhNUFqEsY=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=KDAuBa+IUsn5iUwada6rb+7o/czEjANoO2s/prcqXiSwdAFrTFCc2AHH4I/h29rcE tIXIcoNfOdIpy/fXOaDiCuNfhIVW6klmsnXs+UwRd2IEqJhKoD08pGiQ6vVKs/4Ln0 ryXSA5pAUGspsMp3ty+Y73aWFjGGLkhSY/+ZFDDpbeqUbFJ5cQQtvCbERU95Ro+K0e J0paZl3HZB2eh+D/F4akbXHskNEuLe8BBOEsjrwLT35xlyXO4C62hM1Wg6NICgqCVV 3lTRlRu7UXXtMkZe0D+/tweuckCSlCIgITLR5r7to0n40aediBAN/8sxn92AGdpsTp 55f9r0u3Cq+pg== Date: Mon, 18 Aug 2025 18:30:12 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Hangbin Liu Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Simon Horman , Shuah Khan , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net] selftests: rtnetlink: fix addrlft test flakiness on power-saving systems Message-ID: <20250818183012.35f47956@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250715043459.110523-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> References: <20250715043459.110523-1-liuhangbin@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 15 Jul 2025 04:34:59 +0000 Hangbin Liu wrote: > Jakub reported that the rtnetlink test for the preferred lifetime of an > address has become quite flaky. The issue started appearing around the 6.16 > merge window in May, and the test fails with: > > FAIL: preferred_lft addresses remaining > > The flakiness might be related to power-saving behavior, as address > expiration is handled by a "power-efficient" workqueue. > > To address this, use slowwait to check more frequently whether the address > still exists. This reduces the likelihood of the system entering a low-power > state during the test, improving reliability. It flaked again, after long time of being fine.. https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-net/results/259361/15-rtnetlink-sh/stdout