From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga03.intel.com (mga03.intel.com [134.134.136.65]) (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 4E03633DF for ; Wed, 4 May 2022 23:00:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1651705246; x=1683241246; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version:content-id; bh=HEG4CUPn1xXioS9Vqh2BXiimJbmBTyjQT1n3DgkXdD4=; b=d93xZWESGHNMJTExPdKsK8+5E9gQ6yLWDtjC6+zOYkoJzlcHg54d7Gn7 chXmYr/wkoanM//p2/qVL0swtQYVruSAZ0fLGzuoXoIyFpk2ENHTO918T YcDsbc/CLoRObxEyL8zEw2rf45AO7Y+NRURkZyR3mxywbss0XYFdr7hP3 Ph6lESwMu3X61aSoQeLkAq8CdU1Grv8x0bFxGtdulC1sl/WSXMrt0ki3A WDk81DTxFpyVex++aATCXXt0WgpJ1Nvetx+2j9zSO6bn5PhPJsu8CmFSF AQ9GeNxmmy4QpVmfxlEVXT9qWQ+uvpmaE8rYgZthkzQ4ysT+b+iJYnPun w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10337"; a="267807600" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,199,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="267807600" Received: from fmsmga007.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.52]) by orsmga103.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 May 2022 16:00:45 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,199,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="568321407" Received: from jsbradle-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.212.185.245]) by fmsmga007-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 04 May 2022 16:00:45 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 May 2022 16:00:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Mat Martineau To: Geliang Tang cc: Paolo Abeni , Geliang Tang , MPTCP Upstream Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-next] Squash to "selftests: mptcp: add MP_FAIL reset testcase" - cleanups In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <65c6e3d4-795a-17e0-8a2-337da6e6cfac@linux.intel.com> References: <20220504121429.GA18870@bogon.HOST> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="0-1887405172-1651705127=:21003" Content-ID: <9845cf-67da-48c1-f129-4bf35cc89943@linux.intel.com> This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1887405172-1651705127=:21003 Content-Type: text/plain; CHARSET=ISO-2022-JP; format=flowed Content-ID: <9746493-32bd-6054-4f47-5817d381b8dc@linux.intel.com> On Wed, 4 May 2022, Geliang Tang wrote: > Paolo Abeni 于2022年5月4日周三 21:04写道： >> >> Hi Geliang, >> >> On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 20:14 +0800, Geliang Tang wrote: >>> On Wed, May 04, 2022 at 07:44:24PM +0800, Geliang Tang wrote: >>>> Two small cleanups for MP_FAIL reset test case: >>>> >>>> Reduce the test files size from 1024 to 128, to make the test faster. >>> >>> The original commit log needs to update too: >>> >>> 1024KB -> 128KB >>> >>> ''' >>> Add the multiple subflows test case for MP_FAIL, to test the MP_FAIL >>> reset case. Use the test_linkfail value to make 128KB test files. >>> >>> ... >>> ... >>> ''' >>> >>>> With Paolo's fix [2] for MP_FAIL test-case, the test becomes very slow. >>>> >>>> Drop '+'s passed to chk_csum_nr, with Paolo's fix [1] for act_pedit, no >>>> extra checksum failures now, no need to add '+'s anymore. >>>> >>>> Depends on Paolo's commits: >>>> [1] net/sched: act_pedit: really ensure the skb is writable >>>> [2] selftests: mptcp: fix MP_FAIL test-case >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang >> >> I noticed the the time increase. Unfortunatelly, it may be necessary to >> be reliable in all environment, comprising the slowers one. >> >> Mat (M.) was able to reproduce some failure with b/w == 10Mbps and size >> == 1M. I think/guess he could hit the same failure even with 1Mbps and >> size == 128K. >> >> We need at least some additional testing for this one. > > If so, let's continue to use 1024k test file sizes. > It's reliable for me at 128k so far. I'm fine with squashing the patch as-is, we can increase the file size if CI (or humans) complain. -- Mat Martineau Intel --0-1887405172-1651705127=:21003--