All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@netronome.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, oss-drivers@netronome.com,
	Xingfeng Hu <xingfeng.hu@corigine.com>,
	Baowen Zheng <baowen.zheng@corigine.com>,
	Louis Peens <louis.peens@netronome.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/3] net/sched: act_police: add support for packet-per-second policing
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2021 11:42:23 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210316104223.GA16688@netronome.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YFBt19zVIH6Dgw8w@shredder.lan>

Hi Ido,

On Tue, Mar 16, 2021 at 10:35:35AM +0200, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> Sorry for the delay. Was AFK yesterday

No problem at all.

...

> > > > As follow-ups we plan to provide:
> > > > * Corresponding updates to iproute2
> > > > * Corresponding self tests (which depend on the iproute2 changes)
> > > 
> > > I was about to ask :)
> > > 
> > > FYI, there is this selftest:
> > > tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/tc_police.sh
> > > 
> > > Which can be extended to also test packet rate policing
> > 
> > Thanks Ido,
> > 
> > The approach we have taken is to add tests to
> > tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/police.json
> > 
> > Do you think adding a test to tc_police.sh is also worthwhile? Or should be
> > done instead of updating police.json?
> 
> IIUC, police.json only performs configuration tests. tc_police.sh on the
> other hand, configures a topology, injects traffic and validates that
> the bandwidth after the police action is according to user
> configuration. You can test the software data path by using veth pairs
> or the hardware data path by using physical ports looped to each other.
> 
> So I think that extending both tests is worthwhile.

Thanks, we'll see about making it so.

> > Lastly, my assumption is that the tests should be posted once iproute2
> > changes they depend on have been accepted. Is this correct in your opinion?
> 
> Personally, I prefer selftests to be posted together with the
> implementation, regardless if they depend on new iproute2 functionality.
> In the unlikely case that the kernel patches were accepted, but changes
> were requested for the command line interface, you can always patch the
> selftests later.
> 
> Jakub recently added this section:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/networking/netdev-FAQ.html#how-do-i-post-corresponding-changes-to-user-space-components
> 
> He writes "User space code exercising kernel features should be posted
> alongside kernel patches."
> 
> And you can see that in the example the last patch is a selftest:
> 
> ```
> [PATCH net-next 0/3] net: some feature cover letter
>  └─ [PATCH net-next 1/3] net: some feature prep
>  └─ [PATCH net-next 2/3] net: some feature do it
>  └─ [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftest: net: some feature
> 
> [PATCH iproute2-next] ip: add support for some feature
> ```

Thanks, we'll try to follow this in our next feature submission.

...

      reply	other threads:[~2021-03-16 10:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-03-12 14:08 [PATCH v3 net-next 0/3] net/sched: act_police: add support for packet-per-second policing Simon Horman
2021-03-12 14:08 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 1/3] flow_offload: " Simon Horman
2021-03-12 14:08 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 2/3] flow_offload: reject configuration of packet-per-second policing in offload drivers Simon Horman
2021-03-12 14:08 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 3/3] net/sched: act_police: add support for packet-per-second policing Simon Horman
2021-03-12 14:22 ` [PATCH v3 net-next 0/3] " Simon Horman
2021-03-16 13:53   ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2021-03-16 16:40     ` Simon Horman
2021-03-13 22:40 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2021-03-14  8:17 ` Ido Schimmel
2021-03-15 14:41   ` Simon Horman
2021-03-16  8:35     ` Ido Schimmel
2021-03-16 10:42       ` Simon Horman [this message]

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=20210316104223.GA16688@netronome.com \
    --to=simon.horman@netronome.com \
    --cc=baowen.zheng@corigine.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=idosch@idosch.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=louis.peens@netronome.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oss-drivers@netronome.com \
    --cc=xingfeng.hu@corigine.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.