From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
To: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de>,
Saikrishna Arcot <sarcot@microsoft.com>,
Mike Manning <mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: Change in behavior for bound vs unbound sockets
Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 19:29:15 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e8ea879b-7075-e79d-5da8-0483e7da21af@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <06425eb5-906a-5805-d293-70d240a1197b@molgen.mpg.de>
On 8/31/21 3:12 AM, Paul Menzel wrote:
>> I traced it to one commit (6da5b0f027a8 "net: ensure unbound datagram
>> socket to be chosen when not in a VRF") that makes sure that when not
>> in a VRF, the unbound socket is chosen over the bound socket, if both
>> are available. If I revert this commit and two other commits that
>> made changes on top of this, I can see that packets get sent to the
>> bound socket instead. There's similar commits made for TCP and raw
>> sockets as well, as part of that patch series.
>
> Commit 6da5b0f027a8 (net: ensure unbound datagram socket to be chosen
> when not in a VRF) was added to Linux 5.0.
>
>> Is the intention of those commits also meant to affect sockets that
>> are bound to just regular interfaces (and not only VRFs)? If so,
>> since this change breaks a userspace application, is it possible to
>> add a config that reverts to the old behavior, where bound sockets
>> are preferred over unbound sockets?
> If it breaks user space, the old behavior needs to be restored according
> to Linux’ no regression policy. Let’s hope, in the future, there is
> better testing infrastructure and such issues are noticed earlier.
5.0 was 2-1/2 years ago.
Feel free to add tests to tools/testing/selftests/net/fcnal-test.sh to
cover any missing permutations, including what you believe is the
problem here. Both IPv4 and IPv6 should be added for consistency across
protocols.
nettest.c has a lot of the networking APIs, supports udp, tcp, raw, ...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-01 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-30 23:47 Change in behavior for bound vs unbound sockets Saikrishna Arcot
2021-08-31 10:12 ` Paul Menzel
2021-09-01 2:29 ` David Ahern [this message]
2021-09-02 0:16 ` [EXTERNAL] " Saikrishna Arcot
2021-09-02 3:41 ` David Ahern
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=e8ea879b-7075-e79d-5da8-0483e7da21af@gmail.com \
--to=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=mmanning@vyatta.att-mail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmenzel@molgen.mpg.de \
--cc=sarcot@microsoft.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.