From: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: pmtu: Simplify cleanup and namespace names
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 18:17:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190523181704.0e3b6926@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8b642166-e0f9-cfb7-8e19-5a46f58549b6@gmail.com>
On Thu, 23 May 2019 09:41:59 -0600
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been using the namespace override for a while now. I did consider
> impacts to the above, but my thinking is this: exceptions are per FIB
> entry (per fib6_nh with my latest patch set, but point still holds), FIB
> entries are per FIB table, FIB tables are per network namespace. Running
> multiple pmtu.sh sessions in parallel can not trigger an interdependent
> bug because of that separation. The cleanup within a namespace teardown
> (reference count leaks) should not be affected.
I see, I guess it makes sense.
> Now that we have good set of functional tests, we do need more complex
> tests but those will still be contained within the namespace separation.
> If you look at my current patch set on the list I add an icmp_redirect
> test script. It actually does redirect, verify, mtu on top of redirect,
> verify and then resets and inverts the order - going after an exception
> entry with an update for both use cases.
>
> For the pmtu script, perhaps the next step is something as simple as
> configuring the setup and routing once and then run all of the
> individual tests (or multiple of them) to generate multiple exceptions
> within a single FIB table and then tests to generate multiple exceptions
> with different addresses per entry.
I think, especially given your new icmp_redirect test script, that
another sensible next step would be turning the setup part in pmtu.sh
into some kind of library (also including the VRF setup) that could be
sourced from both scripts. Right now, that looks like a lot of
duplication.
--
Stefano
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-23 16:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-22 19:11 [PATCH net-next] selftests: pmtu: Simplify cleanup and namespace names David Ahern
2019-05-23 0:55 ` David Miller
2019-05-23 7:58 ` Stefano Brivio
2019-05-23 15:41 ` David Ahern
2019-05-23 16:17 ` Stefano Brivio [this message]
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=20190523181704.0e3b6926@redhat.com \
--to=sbrivio@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).