From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from orbyte.nwl.cc (orbyte.nwl.cc [151.80.46.58]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DBBB2BCF8 for ; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 13:08:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=151.80.46.58 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729602485; cv=none; b=p1DzjZCzkhNiNwzt8vg/VBjfwBSTNC1Cww6jUQnJ/1mKj8VgduWFLeE/dGsvL1uJKpgIx1f2WVcjSXqNSP1kUIPQItExnpvky4RcJ5gQlTogsotaSebBvNxjGzviw10ShP6oFsyFHiKOWeqRaymRbr3j+aVWehEKQjeEwX23d/k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1729602485; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cD+ku/JUW+f2cMG6fzcNY3Ijx65eIhVJz12vJla2A84=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=YZKnXsDTQvrQvJJinecVF3ozgjjkTreo+6mXLEE6uEL8TOJdTeP89pa26SnRi3cNibLDEzeCXn+K9pAfTtvHCxuH7o21vVJ5mLjG3covp3bPNeUhsKpQ5UBAXCnbrf0jatJm8ASYHnpJMRatfMA36ziK3sgkQ+kkCaDmK2SLEsQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nwl.cc; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nwl.cc; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nwl.cc header.i=@nwl.cc header.b=A4+QD6SN; arc=none smtp.client-ip=151.80.46.58 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=nwl.cc Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=nwl.cc Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=nwl.cc header.i=@nwl.cc header.b="A4+QD6SN" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=nwl.cc; s=mail2022; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=z+FqN31JPxucZhIkhtPBpaQ0drW1ZEYOOpABMcNRNqo=; b=A4+QD6SNWQMhHYHhKwwrzcXlVZ 9dHQ/cN8m0n4R1KyWCCfsC/407sUmmkXO4DDFEJxvycI1nL5Ekm9XwdzT/YElzvUVaTmKai5MjKtU lNxTB5n5b57PKGPt91dw2CODTA7L539YVNTJnP+pGtst6Gje60OrUbHiIzuAfdq3kR0iaOUwBiDzF e40Z2phE52EEBn1ADVmckLBVUYuYMb6YQfv6v7WMqHA6/Wg/+jSclLedqesyWpd4hX7AngZhMcmpc BmyjhctvDBN3IUhy8ZC7n8CnokqYLcZsPacNeXEY+cb48c19ts03DbcDqS0eNTHgj6Ixa+/EjvoS7 EYxuZvTw==; Received: from n0-1 by orbyte.nwl.cc with local (Exim 4.97.1) (envelope-from ) id 1t3EcD-000000007DE-0Mml; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:08:01 +0200 Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 15:08:01 +0200 From: Phil Sutter To: Pablo Neira Ayuso , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, fw@strlen.de Subject: Re: [PATCH iptables] tests: iptables-test: extend coverage for ip6tables Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Phil Sutter , Pablo Neira Ayuso , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, fw@strlen.de References: <20241020224707.69249-1-pablo@netfilter.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Oct 22, 2024 at 02:30:58PM +0200, Phil Sutter wrote: [...] > - With your patch applied, 20 rules fail (in both variants). Is this > expected or a bug on my side? OK, so most failures are caused by my test kernel not having CONFIG_IP_VS_IPV6 enabled. Apart from that, there is a minor bug in introduced libip6t_recent.t in that it undoes commit d859b91e6f3ed ("extensions: recent: New kernels support 999 hits") by accident. More interesting though, it's reported twice, once for fast mode and once for normal mode. I'll see how I can turn off error reporting in fast mode, failing tests are repeated anyway. Cheers, Phil