Jakub Kicinski kuba@kernel.org writes:
On Wed, 15 May 2024 11:02:28 +0200 Petr Machata wrote:
And then either replace the existing xfail_on_veth's (there are just a handful) or convert xfail_on_veth to a wrapper around xfail_on_kind.
I think the bridge thing we can workaround by just checking if ${NETIFS[p1]} is veth, rather than $rcv_if_name. Since the two behave the same.
I don't follow. The test has two legs, one creates a VRF and attaches p2, the other creates a bridge and attaches p2. Whether p1 and p2 are veth or HW seems orthogonal to whether $rcv_if_name is a bridge or a veth.
Right, my superficial understanding was that the main distinction is whether p2/h2 can do the filtering (or possibly some offload happens). So if p1,p2 are veths we know to XFAIL, doesn't matter if we're in the vrf or bridge configuration, cause these construct will not filter either.
If I'm not making sense - I'm probably confused, I can code up what you suggested, it will work, just more LoC :)
I'm not sure myself, but from the commit message it looks like the issue is with $rcv_if_name being the bridge.
But the patch that you inline is R-b'd and T-b'd by Vladimir, so I'm going to assume it's doing the right thing.
+# Clear internal failure tracking for the next test case +begin_test() +{
- RET=0
- FAIL_TO_XFAIL=
+}
check_err() { local err=$1 diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/local_termination.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/local_termination.sh index c5b0cbc85b3e..a241acc02498 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/local_termination.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/local_termination.sh @@ -73,9 +73,12 @@ check_rcv() local pattern=$3 local should_receive=$4 local should_fail=
- local xfail_sw=$5
[ $should_receive = true ] && should_fail=0 || should_fail=1
- RET=0
- begin_test
- # check if main interface is veth
- [ "$xfail_sw" == true ] && xfail_on_veth $h1
If xfail_on_veth $h1 is all that's needed, then I really don't see a reason why not just do this:
check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to primary MAC address" \ "$smac > $rcv_dmac, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ true
check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to macvlan MAC address" \ "$smac > $MACVLAN_ADDR, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ true
xfail_on_veth $h1 \ check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to unknown MAC address" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_UC_ADDR1, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ false
This should work now, in much the same way as this patch, but the intent is IMHO clearer (vs. passing a mystery true), and FAIL_TO_XFAIL is cleanly scoped and doesn't run the risk of leaking out of the test.
tcpdump_show $if_name | grep -q "$pattern" @@ -157,7 +160,7 @@ run_test() check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to unknown MAC address" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_UC_ADDR1, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \
false
false truecheck_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to unknown MAC address, promisc" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_UC_ADDR2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ @@ -165,7 +168,7 @@ run_test() check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Unicast IPv4 to unknown MAC address, allmulti" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_UC_ADDR3, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \
false
false truecheck_rcv $rcv_if_name "Multicast IPv4 to joined group" \ "$smac > $JOINED_MACV4_MC_ADDR, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ @@ -173,7 +176,7 @@ run_test() check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Multicast IPv4 to unknown group" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_MACV4_MC_ADDR1, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \
false
false truecheck_rcv $rcv_if_name "Multicast IPv4 to unknown group, promisc" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_MACV4_MC_ADDR2, ethertype IPv4 (0x0800)" \ @@ -189,7 +192,7 @@ run_test() check_rcv $rcv_if_name "Multicast IPv6 to unknown group" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_MACV6_MC_ADDR1, ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd)" \
false
false truecheck_rcv $rcv_if_name "Multicast IPv6 to unknown group, promisc" \ "$smac > $UNKNOWN_MACV6_MC_ADDR2, ethertype IPv6 (0x86dd)" \