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 447838BF7; Fri, 17 May 2024 08:54:56 +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=1715936097; cv=none; b=oINjblqZQyrgItslxFuLYk1qDf69T+lI1LvTpJbV7PKQZi+Wrg9Dpcved1PHwADZRsHXLFRvgqGVW+QseN4Te6EXNT4ngJFLhzaFTgf3WefH8Vo7UV0jx/SpCNVrt1tK5rAXf5/c76s66upT3tXplRg2WbxmQpOEAAFXudN3uuo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715936097; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Xog/tS5vq+lgeG72Uoo6J9glCxSk0h/9CurO3SylIhE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=pN+PEa5r8z/YTC6WEH4QEhRhxeH53x8YoDGYk2H6D7Mwiz6HVlPAGBn+pU4GVRnKJU1x7begm7DZdUgUwLQCVdRFXufZ48MihRVWomn+Tyt9IdeMp7LT5+Z8RVaAHsqJmL63oXYmvpoicNaDkTsw3t0yUezG40T++TTnpmtc75E= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Eu9VoAKw; 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="Eu9VoAKw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DAB0FC2BD10; Fri, 17 May 2024 08:54:54 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1715936096; bh=Xog/tS5vq+lgeG72Uoo6J9glCxSk0h/9CurO3SylIhE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=Eu9VoAKw6f2oTSBALK1w42rV42/v/ppmD/OGZ7/GYrc3zPmhBDIL9Z/KNHFOTXFvr RucdJymM6BqmwGyZCdaBD3/x77ExQmBbvfGA1TjmuM40NYD884qdhBqnZ1Yu1st/uJ MAfnFmBIVy7L7tyPe2mUPDVSJPEMwHuYmYwYYQeMRD86lLvk80bc3wsbCaCT42VefA n5t6M04EaVBQUAsCPCMGmevqqghddIlv44JuI1zEvrUqqBqnTQIMMEr+iFHwezEsIs EqpkMLhx5BdCCcjigCt650+aVGeLgA1i8cEqdeCtns3Aua8VwISCSSrWca79tPJGWA IBLru1NTFUp2A== Date: Fri, 17 May 2024 09:54:52 +0100 From: Simon Horman To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, liuhangbin@gmail.com, shuah@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Petr Machata , vladimir.oltean@nxp.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3] selftests: net: local_termination: annotate the expected failures Message-ID: <20240517085452.GC443576@kernel.org> References: <20240516152513.1115270-1-kuba@kernel.org> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240516152513.1115270-1-kuba@kernel.org> On Thu, May 16, 2024 at 08:25:13AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > Vladimir said when adding this test: > > The bridge driver fares particularly badly [...] mainly because > it does not implement IFF_UNICAST_FLT. > > See commit 90b9566aa5cd ("selftests: forwarding: add a test for > local_termination.sh"). > > We don't want to hide the known gaps, but having a test which > always fails prevents us from catching regressions. Report > the cases we know may fail as XFAIL. > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski I agree that XFAIL is appropriate for cases like this - the test is expected to fail and this can act like a TODO. I also looked over how xfail_on_veth works and this usage seems correct to me. Reviewed-by: Simon Horman