From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 DA51324A18; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 19:17:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707506252; cv=none; b=l121sjxXyLMj9QxS2TtzpY12ufbC2YtxnCvJPVNbnlCPo3ejv2rEzumI5XNAS+mBfPQ+Le13ayIn2XzFdPalRT0tBP5NOiLiaM2vQS22mfZzn+QeWhHPR375AgK6wGHR26ZdFt4Q2kHUbxEcJDH5sY1gYu9bCxBBGC0IWF1AbPQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707506252; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zaVJSnrROIb9+4Q970mflzhbcd1oZPVJap1y18HAbRs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LAajjpLPdjWYuWwC2E10Ep6KdNofDuUI0n+PhlLcT8P9Gv/t61BpoItEmJqmzqBZ3NWxU9a2ALaEeE6wurCtpzTPHXHhqQyabUUESsq+g331iu5fd9JOSgLqHTtgEhexPHvuX9SSkGQntdLHcqydp2TBgbSQaBpbGbabPLKNvq0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Ikk19bAT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Ikk19bAT" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0DB2DC433C7; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 19:17:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1707506251; bh=zaVJSnrROIb9+4Q970mflzhbcd1oZPVJap1y18HAbRs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Ikk19bATF1B9VStsRKFpK+k5XF2U7gO+DK3ar7XWVue539ebhU6PfBcKlRmvlZdOn IE02UeWr7hP+zfgaQEa30Cgww2/nz5Oe9XaWwhwItsF0sN+UCKVTciN5I+i4rnR9So 8j2NVO+rrCrLkX0Ot8JgccIPlZa1I5RQHneVZn++eZLrYDPorkyaGl9+VaO0m0zddq QVbBFIBXHCWVnsWv9C0y7VUj77vdWFvG4rfUmzf7AmUGSggtl3vf3rktOzipinw70N uuBFzb8yECqX0ffddOrn2WB1+4oCXIEpF8/ap0SHdQwCR+ygCoho7oGDptTi9+jvrJ Ac6+x038YmWtw== Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 11:17:30 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Paolo Abeni Cc: Willem de Bruijn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Shuah Khan , Vinicius Costa Gomes , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net] selftests: net: wait for receiver startup in so_txtime.sh Message-ID: <20240209111730.5e67d9ac@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: References: <53a7e56424756ef35434bc15a90b256bcf724651.1707407012.git.pabeni@redhat.com> <5b768c89eb2992c22ca7016de9f90ff7d4eecd5f.camel@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Fri, 09 Feb 2024 17:45:28 +0100 Paolo Abeni wrote: > But I'm pretty sure that even with that there will be sporadic failures > in slow enough environments. > > When the host-induced jitter/delay is high enough, packets are dropped > and there are functional failures. I'm wondering if we should skip this > test entirely when KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW=yes. By skip do you mean the same approach as to the gro test? Ignore errors? Because keeping the code coverage for KASAN etc. would still be good (stating the obvious, sorry).