From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga01.intel.com (mga01.intel.com [192.55.52.88]) (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 B39B233CA for ; Tue, 3 May 2022 18:39:44 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1651603184; x=1683139184; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=yPGa3ptepqY0eGEwfvy7thF/1rAWZ26iDnYWlQvfAIQ=; b=djQxCdDP40V3dXiLhGUagttPU2du/QA4NTFVcjeEP25yK2XBW6CIbgHt 2sAbu7b5skL+w04kxwVPxVHSPpOjPlkS9/bEXr42E8CW0D3FNp7iV+7o5 yXcsrDFr2mEUiUrLWkUICcfy7iLf468QV+YOA0TrqMYdS6LNEpsFzxoo4 J1qdkl9p4Oxv4BXydbMbSGAFllM/Dp1aPixaMu5D5Sz9yUxl3qUUfE3+G 6ppFuEObKuer9DYLcY393zXSjZ6ZBKo6Ih3+aWMbK9ZLn9Gokcd52NZpg myvgDu/HYvZ5///whN5lPEogEvwXZTEzDbzBAJPkBm3YhGPwX1sp5FHZm w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10336"; a="292747651" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,195,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="292747651" Received: from orsmga001.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.18]) by fmsmga101.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 May 2022 11:39:43 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.91,196,1647327600"; d="scan'208";a="599186666" Received: from skarmaka-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.209.21.54]) by orsmga001-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 03 May 2022 11:39:43 -0700 Date: Tue, 3 May 2022 11:39:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Mat Martineau To: Paolo Abeni cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH mptcp-net] selftests: mptcp: fix MP_FAIL test-case In-Reply-To: <66bebfa5f6fcfc6180e13861bd1f629b066a5f4d.camel@redhat.com> Message-ID: References: <7d6e2ab9-ac1-a86f-2ce4-4551e63eb087@linux.intel.com> <66bebfa5f6fcfc6180e13861bd1f629b066a5f4d.camel@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed On Tue, 3 May 2022, Paolo Abeni wrote: > Hello, > > On Fri, 2022-04-29 at 12:46 -0700, Mat Martineau wrote: >> On Fri, 29 Apr 2022, Paolo Abeni wrote: >> >>> The mentioned tests sometimes fails because the data >>> transfer completes before any packet is sent on the 2nd >>> link (the failing one). >>> >>> Address the issue reducing the "virtual" b/w available >>> on the primary link. >>> >>> Fixes: bfd4cdbe7032 ("selftests: mptcp: add MP_FAIL reset testcase") >>> Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni >>> --- >>> together with the previous patch this fixes issues/265 for >>> good here. I'm not adding the Close tag due to the mentioned >>> dep, which may take a different/longer route >>> --- >>> tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_join.sh | 2 +- >>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_join.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_join.sh >>> index a98fee834950..0d65295c1b33 100755 >>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_join.sh >>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_join.sh >>> @@ -2734,7 +2734,7 @@ fail_tests() >>> >>> # multiple subflows >>> if reset_with_fail "MP_FAIL MP_RST" 2; then >>> - tc -n $ns2 qdisc add dev ns2eth1 root netem rate 20mbit delay 1 >>> + tc -n $ns2 qdisc add dev ns2eth1 root netem rate 10mbit delay 5 >> >> The "MP_FAIL MP_RST" test still fails within a couple of minutes on my >> desktop with this change. I changed 10mbit to 1mbit and so far it is still >> running. You ok with slowing it down even more? > > [sorry I almost missed this comment]. Just to be sure, is such test > running on top of the pedit patch? (we need both of them). Otherwise no > objection to reduce the rate even more. > Yes, I was testing with both patches applied. -- Mat Martineau Intel