From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org AC0D64180F DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 6BF1A40978 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=Nvidia.com; s=selector2; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=KDev4h0NnBgmjI2bEQrPsQycTtB9XDfUzzJHeIjxhN0=; b=PvUAWzflhGE/Ww2Z4xoPfINUG51Z518rHsfJfj2O6mLRmrjddumPQnHh2yg6Zoj1reTGQx3TVvVNclWMwsCn45CJ+S7FS92LxP1VLgw/B5O2S5pxlHQzPvUwMQlobVqqqrKZ4BNraO6xS3YqbMR8kYJcsj2Q8JZP+c8nwTH5lahOReW9dDqzhjLL4MNzxOtJCQP1L7Ho/u5fkmNzAsM1uvGkclKquAWW5iQk3qNyswA52ZiHMfPB60CU1cE4nZSoQOhTZLibm4Dgi3jCqVKoEtLNtUi4olmHTcz4wnaj2kwCJzNlK2VOLgkENZf7JHEo8KQh6Q+E4qRxBNewztYTnA== Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 19:40:13 +0300 From: Ido Schimmel Message-ID: References: <20230318141010.513424-1-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <20230318141010.513424-7-netdev@kapio-technology.com> <87a5zzh65p.fsf@kapio-technology.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87a5zzh65p.fsf@kapio-technology.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 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: Hans Schultz 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 , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment_L=E9ger?= , 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 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?! I see you trimmed my earlier question: "Does this actually work?" I tried it and it passed: # ./bridge_locked_port.sh TEST: Locked port ipv4 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port ipv6 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port vlan [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB roam [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB configuration [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB FDB flush [ OK ] And I couldn't understand how that's even possible. Then I realized that the entire test is dead code because the patch is missing this fundamental hunk: ``` diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_locked_port.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_locked_port.sh index dbc7017fd45d..5bf6b2aa1098 100755 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_locked_port.sh +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/bridge_locked_port.sh @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ ALL_TESTS=" locked_port_mab_roam locked_port_mab_config locked_port_mab_flush + locked_port_dyn_fdb " NUM_NETIFS=4 ``` Which tells me that you didn't even try running it once. Now the test failed as I expected: # ./bridge_locked_port.sh TEST: Locked port ipv4 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port ipv6 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port vlan [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB roam [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB configuration [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB FDB flush [ OK ] TEST: Locked port dyn FDB [FAIL] Packet not seen on egress after adding dynamic FDB Fixed by: ``` @@ -336,7 +337,7 @@ locked_port_dyn_fdb() tc filter add dev $swp2 egress protocol ip pref 1 handle 1 flower \ dst_ip 192.0.2.2 ip_proto udp dst_port 12345 action pass - $MZ $swp1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ + $MZ $h1 -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_err $? "Packet not seen on egress after adding dynamic FDB" ``` Ran it again and it failed because of the second issue I pointed out: # ./bridge_locked_port.sh TEST: Locked port ipv4 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port ipv6 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port vlan [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB roam [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB configuration [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB FDB flush [ OK ] TEST: Locked port dyn FDB [FAIL] Dynamic FDB entry did not age out Fixed by: ``` @@ -346,7 +347,7 @@ locked_port_dyn_fdb() $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" + check_err $? "Dynamic FDB entry did not age out" ip link set dev br0 type bridge ageing_time $ageing_time bridge link set dev $swp1 learning off locked off ``` # ./bridge_locked_port.sh TEST: Locked port ipv4 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port ipv6 [ OK ] TEST: Locked port vlan [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB roam [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB configuration [ OK ] TEST: Locked port MAB FDB flush [ OK ] TEST: Locked port dyn FDB [ OK ] Sigh