From: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@kernel.org>
To: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel Functional Testing <lkft@linaro.org>,
Kernel Selftests <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@linaro.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: LKFT CI: improving Networking selftests results when validating stable kernels
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2024 13:43:14 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c4ed1f88-e43b-4b12-bffc-faf27879042c@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1bda012e-817a-45be-82e2-03ac78c58034@stanley.mountain>
Hi Dan,
Thank you for your reply!
On 13/11/2024 18:08, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 08, 2024 at 07:21:59PM +0100, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>> KSelftests from the same version
>> --------------------------------
>>
>> According to the doc [2], kselftests should support all previous kernel
>> versions. The LKFT CI is then using the kselftests from the last stable
>> release to validate all stable versions. Even if there are good reasons
>> to do that, we would like to ask for an opt-out for this policy for the
>> networking tests: this is hard to maintain with the increased
>> complexity, hard to validate on all stable kernels before applying
>> patches, and hard to put in place in some situations. As a result, many
>> tests are failing on older kernels, and it looks like it is a lot of
>> work to support older kernels, and to maintain this.
>>
>> Many networking tests are validating the internal behaviour that is not
>> exposed to the userspace. A typical example: some tests look at the raw
>> packets being exchanged during a test, and this behaviour can change
>> without modifying how the userspace is interacting with the kernel. The
>> kernel could expose capabilities, but that's not something that seems
>> natural to put in place for internal behaviours that are not exposed to
>> end users. Maybe workarounds could be used, e.g. looking at kernel
>> symbols, etc. Nut that doesn't always work, increase the complexity, and
>> often "false positive" issue will be noticed only after a patch hits
>> stable, and will cause a bunch of tests to be ignored.
>>
>> Regarding fixes, ideally they will come with a new or modified test that
>> can also be backported. So the coverage can continue to grow in stable
>> versions too.
>>
>> Do you think that from the kernel v6.12 (or before?), the LKFT CI could
>> run the networking kselftests from the version that is being validated,
>> and not from a newer one? So validating the selftests from v6.12.1 on a
>> v6.12.1, and not the ones from a future v6.16.y on a v6.12.42.
>>
>
> These kinds of decisions are something that Greg and Shuah need to decide on.
Thank you, it makes sense.
> You would still need some way to automatically detect that kselftest is running
> on an old kernel and disable the networking checks. Otherwise when random
> people on the internet try to run selftests they would run into issues.
Indeed. I guess we can always add a warning when the kernel and
selftests versions are different. I suppose the selftests are built
using the same kernel version, then executed on older versions: we could
then compare the kernel versions at build time and run time, no?
Regarding the other questions from my previous email -- skipped tests
(e.g. I think Netfilter tests are no longer validated), KVM,
notifications -- do you know who at Linaro could eventually look at them?
Cheers,
Matt
--
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-15 12:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-08 18:21 LKFT CI: improving Networking selftests results when validating stable kernels Matthieu Baerts
2024-11-13 17:08 ` Dan Carpenter
2024-11-15 12:43 ` Matthieu Baerts [this message]
2024-11-15 13:07 ` Dan Carpenter
2024-11-15 15:49 ` Matthieu Baerts
2024-11-13 18:33 ` Shuah Khan
2024-11-15 12:43 ` Matthieu Baerts
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=c4ed1f88-e43b-4b12-bffc-faf27879042c@kernel.org \
--to=matttbe@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.carpenter@linaro.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lkft@linaro.org \
--cc=naresh.kamboju@linaro.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=willemb@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox