I updated the kernel to v6.2.8 and the test runs fine.
Thank you for the help
-----Original Message----- From: Kuniyuki Iwashima kuniyu@amazon.com Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 1:14 AM To: kuba@kernel.org; Rai, Anjali anjali.rai@intel.com Cc: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org; Gandhi, Jinen jinen.gandhi@intel.com; joannelkoong@gmail.com; Qin, Kailun kailun.qin@intel.com; kuniyu@amazon.com; netdev@vger.kernel.org; regressions@lists.linux.dev; stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Regression Issue
From: Jakub Kicinski kuba@kernel.org Date: Mon, 8 May 2023 12:31:38 -0700
On Mon, 8 May 2023 08:27:49 +0000 Rai, Anjali wrote:
On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 07:33:58AM +0000, Rai, Anjali wrote:
We have one test which test the functionality of "using the same loopback address and port for both IPV6 and IPV4", The test should result in EADDRINUSE for binding IPv4 to same port, but it was successful
Test Description: The test creates sockets for both IPv4 and IPv6, and forces IPV6 to listen for both IPV4 and IPV6 connections; this in turn makes binding another (IPV4) socket on the same port meaningless and results in -EADDRINUSE
Our systems had Kernel v6.0.9 and the test was successfully executing, we recently upgraded our systems to v6.2, and we saw this as a failure. The systems which are not upgraded, there it is still passing.
We don't exactly at which point this test broke, but our assumption is https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/28044fc1d4953b07acec0da 4d2fc4 784c57ea6fb
Is there a specific reason you did not add cc: for the authors of that commit?
Can you please check on your end whether this is an actual regression of a feature request.
If you revert that commit, does it resolve the issue? Have you worked with the Intel networking developers to help debug this further?
I am part of Gramine OpenSource Project, I don't know someone from Intel Networking developers team, if you know someone, please feel free to add them.
Building completely linux source code and trying with different commits, I will not be able to do it today, I can check that may be tomorrow or day after.
The C code was passing earlier, and output was " test completed successfully" but now with v6.2 it is failing and returning "bind(ipv4) was successful even though there is no IPV6_V6ONLY on same port\n"
Adding the mailing list and the experts. Cleaning up the quoting, please don't top post going forward.
Kuniyuki, have we seen this before?
Yes, we had the same report [0] and fixed with this patch [1], and it seems to be backported to v6.1.21 and v6.2.8, not v6.0.y (EOL).
[0]: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/e21bf153-80b0-9ec0-15ba-e04a4ad42c34@redhat.c... [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20230312031904.4674-2-kuniyu@amazon.com/ [2]: https://lore.kernel.org/stable/?q=tcp%3A+Fix+bind%28%29+conflict+check+for+d....