From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx1.secunet.com (mx1.secunet.com [62.96.220.36]) (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 C34B1252906 for ; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 08:50:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.96.220.36 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761036617; cv=none; b=qY5Oli8EOHE9MRc5qURX83Y4BXeh1dcW4rBrpaxmBJsGkuasT48s+xmzsbnuFSVM6n5iouAyAQ504JLDG4jtKW+w1f1VReWYTvKpI6+MjeUGvpWwMu04oPq1Lq/Qrodu/y+/+wxMIIooLsw5c9EX+mokAu4wt9M55eJOXPPaPyc= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761036617; c=relaxed/simple; bh=wndupjH5Sua+28vDjCRLmOOCVxHW++gOVaUH97vw8/s=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=XdPyh/kM1vVgmHa2kSSzpaD6FuovaZlZ0i/vviB3IcwwWxHJG3RersNi0PjQCFffnuabOxnTTPDZfmQJBzhQ8xqtjv/6LDPks79SwFt9f/WTvhZHS1RYtnRkI47jjhZV8SSsm0vXyWKZIpThG0naBF1sL4JGkMtuVUB2ioSdrec= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=secunet.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=secunet.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=secunet.com header.i=@secunet.com header.b=a8lHBt0/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=62.96.220.36 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=secunet.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=secunet.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=secunet.com header.i=@secunet.com header.b="a8lHBt0/" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx1.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0A43620839; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:50:05 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from mx1.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mx1.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0wuVR7HoUC-t; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:50:04 +0200 (CEST) Received: from EXCH-01.secunet.de (unknown [10.32.0.231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0410A206BC; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:50:04 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 mx1.secunet.com 0410A206BC DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=secunet.com; s=202301; t=1761036604; bh=RUBh9UYVKUuQsKDTiQthbtQrX8SdUP8OP+RYt7Uq1fI=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=a8lHBt0/Swo3Jo5Eqqw2OLd7C8EroKgncC7mCh+NhNY0tFXgVspUmj9gAtRNPqasj ZOPXl5RInLfqPZ07iJAHdG4lam80d33iMpmPZQb3x68SBPBIZdHkNHrTzu7elvD7qM sY51iV3NQMXhe+b65QZFWkhj+UWOuyq8kHGYrUDsj5quTvmoXGoDbPejq7R6pDXco5 pNW+N5Ju/3BWgFG8X1Gg7+BurUTA3qDnIUxeoehQ2sgETBSrgcoBXdNnZhfOg7WkCA aCmXkv2y5lXNnfc5vBp1M4Upi36lyxUc4O/aJlN5i9A1do0lpBfx2jJgy6fUpg8pZy QpKzIZmJYtJhg== Received: from secunet.com (10.182.7.193) by EXCH-01.secunet.de (10.32.0.171) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.2.2562.17; Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:50:03 +0200 Received: (nullmailer pid 2817729 invoked by uid 1000); Tue, 21 Oct 2025 08:50:03 -0000 Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2025 10:50:03 +0200 From: Steffen Klassert To: Sabrina Dubroca CC: , , kernel test robot , Alexey Dobriyan Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec 6/6] xfrm: check all hash buckets for leftover states during netns deletion Message-ID: References: <2a743a05bbad7ebdc36c2c86a5fcbb9e99071c7b.1760610268.git.sd@queasysnail.net> <202510172159.iLR9bfcc-lkp@intel.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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-ClientProxiedBy: cas-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.201) To EXCH-01.secunet.de (10.32.0.171) Hi Sabrina, On Mon, Oct 20, 2025 at 01:00:42AM +0200, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > Hi Steffen, > > 2025-10-17, 23:10:36 +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > Hi Sabrina, > > > > kernel test robot noticed the following build warnings: > > > > [auto build test WARNING on klassert-ipsec-next/master] > > [also build test WARNING on klassert-ipsec/master net/main net-next/main linus/master v6.18-rc1 next-20251016] > > [If your patch is applied to the wrong git tree, kindly drop us a note. > > And when submitting patch, we suggest to use '--base' as documented in > > https://git-scm.com/docs/git-format-patch#_base_tree_information] > > > > url: https://github.com/intel-lab-lkp/linux/commits/Sabrina-Dubroca/xfrm-drop-SA-reference-in-xfrm_state_update-if-dir-doesn-t-match/20251016-184507 > > base: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/klassert/ipsec-next.git master > > patch link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/2a743a05bbad7ebdc36c2c86a5fcbb9e99071c7b.1760610268.git.sd%40queasysnail.net > > patch subject: [PATCH ipsec 6/6] xfrm: check all hash buckets for leftover states during netns deletion > > config: x86_64-randconfig-r123-20251017 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251017/202510172159.iLR9bfcc-lkp@intel.com/config) > > compiler: clang version 20.1.8 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project 87f0227cb60147a26a1eeb4fb06e3b505e9c7261) > > reproduce (this is a W=1 build): (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20251017/202510172159.iLR9bfcc-lkp@intel.com/reproduce) > > > > If you fix the issue in a separate patch/commit (i.e. not just a new version of > > the same patch/commit), kindly add following tags > > | Reported-by: kernel test robot > > | Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-kbuild-all/202510172159.iLR9bfcc-lkp@intel.com/ > > > > sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>) > [...] > > 3308 void xfrm_state_fini(struct net *net) > > 3309 { > > 3310 unsigned int sz; > > 3311 int i; > > 3312 > > 3313 flush_work(&net->xfrm.state_hash_work); > > 3314 xfrm_state_flush(net, 0, false); > > 3315 flush_work(&xfrm_state_gc_work); > > 3316 > > 3317 WARN_ON(!list_empty(&net->xfrm.state_all)); > > 3318 > > 3319 for (i = 0; i <= net->xfrm.state_hmask; i++) { > > > 3320 WARN_ON(!hlist_empty(net->xfrm.state_byseq + i)); > > So, before my patch there was a sparse waraning on the > > WARN_ON(!hlist_empty(net->xfrm.state_by*)); > > lines, and now there's a sparse warning on the loop. > (and plenty on other lines in net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c) > > This bot message gave me the push to finally take a look at all the > sparse warnings in net/xfrm/xfrm_state.c, I have solutions for a big > chunk of them (and a few in other files). > > If you want to drop this patch from the set, I'll re-send it later, on > top of the sparse stuff. The rest of the series works without it. If > you want to take it as is, it doesn't change the sparse situation in > this file (a few warnings moved around) and I'll do the sparse > cleanups on top of it. I'll take the patchset as is and wait for your sparse fixes on top. Thanks!