From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06DB0C433F5 for ; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 19:10:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1346870AbiBBTKS (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Feb 2022 14:10:18 -0500 Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:42091 "EHLO out4-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230380AbiBBTKR (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Feb 2022 14:10:17 -0500 Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA6E05C0211; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 14:10:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 02 Feb 2022 14:10:16 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:sender:subject:subject:to:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy :x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; bh=a8NQiCCeGYULo55oR /YsdFKaN5+fz/zKpwhE3X+lbb0=; b=E7ZXSr8OpmfukC456ySkHeJO4Uu6HkkPa qNAULPg1PhBhmOcU/JUk7dBUorMbCzk9VYpguI5JhFeFLFxQoI5L1l5PWaA0Dg+Y gqEywGgsRAW6u33dIJO6pJmpqob854V/Y3n6mZDiboMwGiJX7ZwZcDjOW+KFLN8n de9a6U+3i+TJlSnRBgVVh34aZcimAsP+Rtz8XMleBr3Fb8D3gAIEPpW8AinNBhuF NbVFMMkrBdPPFzW6fNPIxr0FBhWUMjHZKy4vrAViAxS8OqW4LW0cskK9KsTkx5+A BSurUZmCFcc2+WJO7RJFXZkMxm866vF99M5Ab0l7iKUCU5Us/r4uw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvvddrgeehgdduvdduucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehttdertddttddvnecuhfhrohhmpefkughoucfu tghhihhmmhgvlhcuoehiughoshgthhesihguohhstghhrdhorhhgqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpedtffekkeefudffveegueejffejhfetgfeuuefgvedtieehudeuueekhfduheel teenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehiug hoshgthhesihguohhstghhrdhorhhg X-ME-Proxy: Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 2 Feb 2022 14:10:15 -0500 (EST) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 21:10:12 +0200 From: Ido Schimmel To: Guillaume Nault Cc: David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Shuah Khan , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Ido Schimmel , Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: fib offload: use sensible tos values Message-ID: References: <5e43b343720360a1c0e4f5947d9e917b26f30fbf.1643826556.git.gnault@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5e43b343720360a1c0e4f5947d9e917b26f30fbf.1643826556.git.gnault@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 02, 2022 at 07:30:28PM +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote: > Although both iproute2 and the kernel accept 1 and 2 as tos values for > new routes, those are invalid. These values only set ECN bits, which > are ignored during IPv4 fib lookups. Therefore, no packet can actually > match such routes. This selftest therefore only succeeds because it > doesn't verify that the new routes do actually work in practice (it > just checks if the routes are offloaded or not). > > It makes more sense to use tos values that don't conflict with ECN. > This way, the selftest won't be affected if we later decide to warn or > even reject invalid tos configurations for new routes. > > Signed-off-by: Guillaume Nault Reviewed-by: Ido Schimmel Thanks