Hi Jakub, On Fri, 2 Aug 2024 at 16:18, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 02 Aug 2024 10:23:24 +0100 Dmitry Safonov via B4 Relay wrote: > > First 4 patches are more-or-less cleanups/preparations. > > > > Patch 5 was sent to me/contributed off-list by Mohammad, who wants 32-bit > > kernels to run TCP-AO. > > > > Patch 6 is a workaround/fix for slow VMs. Albeit, I can't reproduce > > the issue, but I hope it will fix netdev flakes for connect-deny-* > > tests. > > Hm, could be a coincidence but we did hit: > > # not ok 55 # error 381[unsigned-md5.c:24] Failed to add a VRF: -17 > # not ok 56 # error 383[unsigned-md5.c:33] Failed to add a route to VRF: -22: Key was rejected by service > > https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710001/4-unsigned-md5-ipv6/stdout Yeah, I think I've seen that previously on netdev as well, but quite rarely. Let me take a look and see why adding a VRF table sometimes fails with EEXIST. > in the first run after this got queued. But the retry worked: > > https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710001/4-unsigned-md5-ipv6-retry/stdout > > 🤷️ [from another email] > oooh another run, another (different) flake: > https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-tcp-ao-dbg/results/710181/11-key-management-ipv4/stdout Yeah, this is related to this very patch set. Some more work clearly needed :-) Thanks, Dmitry
