From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org 4D9E660DC2 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp3.osuosl.org DA50B60B9E From: Hans Schultz In-Reply-To: References: <20230318141010.513424-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <20230318141010.513424-7-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <87a5zzh65p.fsf@kapio-technology.com> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 21:30:08 +0200 Message-ID: <87fs9ollmn.fsf@kapio-technology.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH v2 net-next 6/6] selftests: forwarding: add dynamic FDB test List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Ido Schimmel Cc: Andrew Lunn , Alexandre Belloni , Nikolay Aleksandrov , Kurt Kanzenbach , Eric Dumazet , "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" , Shuah Khan , Ivan Vecera , Florian Fainelli , "moderated list:ETHERNET BRIDGE" , Roopa Prabhu , kuba@kernel.org, Paolo Abeni , =?utf-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment_L=C3=A9ger?= , Christian Marangi , Woojung Huh , Landen Chao , Jiri Pirko , Hauke Mehrtens , Sean Wang , DENG Qingfang , Claudiu Manoil , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , Matthias Brugger , "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , netdev@vger.kernel.org, open list , "maintainer:MICROCHIP KSZ SERIES ETHERNET SWITCH DRIVER" , "open list:RENESAS RZ/N1 A5PSW SWITCH DRIVER" , Vladimir Oltean , davem@davemloft.net On Tue, Mar 28, 2023 at 19:40, Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 05:41:06PM +0200, Hans Schultz wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 10:44, Ido Schimmel wrote: >> >> + $MZ $swp1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ >> >> + -a $mac -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q >> >> + tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 1 >> >> + check_fail $? "Dynamic FDB entry did not age out" >> > >> > Shouldn't this be check_err()? After the FDB entry was aged you want to >> > make sure that packets received via $swp1 with SMAC being $mac are no >> > longer forwarded by the bridge. >> >> I was thinking that check_fail() will pass when tc_check_packets() does >> not see any packets, thus the test passing here when no packets are forwarded? > > What do you mean by "I was *thinking*"? How is it possible that you are > submitting a selftest that you didn't bother running?! > Sorry, but I have sent you several emails telling you about the problems I have with running the selftests due to changes in the phy etc. Maybe you have just not received all those emails? Have you checked spamfilters? With the kernels now, I cannot even test with the software bridge and selftests as the compile fails - probably due to changes in uapi headers compared to what the packages my system uses expects.