From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andrew at lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:01:40 +0100 Subject: [Linux-kselftest-mirror] [RFC PATCH net-next 02/12] selftests: forwarding: Add a test for FDB learning In-Reply-To: <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> References: <20180115191853.26129-1-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115191853.26129-3-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115194146.GA31030@lunn.ch> <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> Message-ID: <20180115210140.GB31030@lunn.ch> > Good idea. We can actually do that with only two ports. Disable flooding > on port A, check packets with DMAC A don't egress the port. Inject a > packet with SMAC A through port A, check packets with DMAC A egress the > port. Hi Ido You could do it like that. But that is more testing that you can disable flooding. And how often do users do that? What does your marketing department tell you about typical users of your switches? For DSA, we typically have 4 or 5 ports. 4 of those ports are typically in one bridge, and the remaining port is used alone. That is the sort of setup i test in DSA. Your switches typically have 40 ports? Do your users setup 20 bridges each with two ports? I would test the use cases which people actually use. I expect people setup a bridge with multiple ports, and they send traffic without changing any defaults. So that setup is what i would test. Andrew -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: andrew@lunn.ch (Andrew Lunn) Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:01:40 +0100 Subject: [Linux-kselftest-mirror] [RFC PATCH net-next 02/12] selftests: forwarding: Add a test for FDB learning In-Reply-To: <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> References: <20180115191853.26129-1-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115191853.26129-3-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115194146.GA31030@lunn.ch> <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> Message-ID: <20180115210140.GB31030@lunn.ch> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Message-ID: <20180115210140.-srDc9hph-1ZCY5G23sAZSipSgsHt_H-omovk3PryaU@z> > Good idea. We can actually do that with only two ports. Disable flooding > on port A, check packets with DMAC A don't egress the port. Inject a > packet with SMAC A through port A, check packets with DMAC A egress the > port. Hi Ido You could do it like that. But that is more testing that you can disable flooding. And how often do users do that? What does your marketing department tell you about typical users of your switches? For DSA, we typically have 4 or 5 ports. 4 of those ports are typically in one bridge, and the remaining port is used alone. That is the sort of setup i test in DSA. Your switches typically have 40 ports? Do your users setup 20 bridges each with two ports? I would test the use cases which people actually use. I expect people setup a bridge with multiple ports, and they send traffic without changing any defaults. So that setup is what i would test. Andrew -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kselftest" in the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andrew Lunn Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 02/12] selftests: forwarding: Add a test for FDB learning Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2018 22:01:40 +0100 Message-ID: <20180115210140.GB31030@lunn.ch> References: <20180115191853.26129-1-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115191853.26129-3-idosch@mellanox.com> <20180115194146.GA31030@lunn.ch> <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Ido Schimmel , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, shuah@kernel.org, dsahern@gmail.com, nikolay@cumulusnetworks.com, roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, andy@greyhouse.net, jiri@mellanox.com, mlxsw@mellanox.com, saeedm@mellanox.com, tariqt@mellanox.com, jhs@mojatatu.com, lucasb@mojatatu.com, f.fainelli@gmail.com, vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com, simon.horman@netronome.com To: Ido Schimmel Return-path: Received: from vps0.lunn.ch ([185.16.172.187]:49197 "EHLO vps0.lunn.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750732AbeAOVBp (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Jan 2018 16:01:45 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20180115200520.GA27952@splinter> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > Good idea. We can actually do that with only two ports. Disable flooding > on port A, check packets with DMAC A don't egress the port. Inject a > packet with SMAC A through port A, check packets with DMAC A egress the > port. Hi Ido You could do it like that. But that is more testing that you can disable flooding. And how often do users do that? What does your marketing department tell you about typical users of your switches? For DSA, we typically have 4 or 5 ports. 4 of those ports are typically in one bridge, and the remaining port is used alone. That is the sort of setup i test in DSA. Your switches typically have 40 ports? Do your users setup 20 bridges each with two ports? I would test the use cases which people actually use. I expect people setup a bridge with multiple ports, and they send traffic without changing any defaults. So that setup is what i would test. Andrew