[PATCH net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes

[PATCH net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes

[Jakub Kicinski]

Most of the packetdrill tests have not flaked once last week.
Add the few which did to the XFAIL list.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
---
CC: shuah@kernel.org
CC: willemb@google.com
CC: matttbe@kernel.org
CC: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org

Every time I sit down to add more I plan to just XFAIL all of packetdrill
on slow machines, but then I convince myself otherwise. One last time?
---
 tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh | 4 ++++
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
index ef8b25a606d8..c5b01e1bd4c7 100755
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
@@ -39,11 +39,15 @@ if [[ -n "${KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW}" ]]; then
 	# xfail tests that are known flaky with dbg config, not fixable.
 	# still run them for coverage (and expect 100% pass without dbg).
 	declare -ar xfail_list=(
+		"tcp_blocking_blocking-connect.pkt"
+		"tcp_blocking_blocking-read.pkt"
 		"tcp_eor_no-coalesce-retrans.pkt"
 		"tcp_fast_recovery_prr-ss.*.pkt"
+		"tcp_sack_sack-route-refresh-ip-tos.pkt"
 		"tcp_slow_start_slow-start-after-win-update.pkt"
 		"tcp_timestamping.*.pkt"
 		"tcp_user_timeout_user-timeout-probe.pkt"
+		"tcp_zerocopy_cl.*.pkt"
 		"tcp_zerocopy_epoll_.*.pkt"
 		"tcp_tcp_info_tcp-info-.*-limited.pkt"
 	)
-- 
2.49.0

Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes

[Matthieu Baerts]

Hi Jakub,

On 10/06/2025 02:00, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Most of the packetdrill tests have not flaked once last week.
> Add the few which did to the XFAIL list.

Thank you for monitoring these tests!

> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
> CC: shuah@kernel.org
> CC: willemb@google.com
> CC: matttbe@kernel.org
> CC: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
> 
> Every time I sit down to add more I plan to just XFAIL all of packetdrill
> on slow machines, but then I convince myself otherwise. One last time?

:)

Did some of these packetdrill tests fail only when using a debug kernel?
But yes, I guess we can always say: "maybe one day that will pay off" :)

As long as it is manageable!

> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
> index ef8b25a606d8..c5b01e1bd4c7 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/ksft_runner.sh
> @@ -39,11 +39,15 @@ if [[ -n "${KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW}" ]]; then
>  	# xfail tests that are known flaky with dbg config, not fixable.
>  	# still run them for coverage (and expect 100% pass without dbg).
>  	declare -ar xfail_list=(
> +		"tcp_blocking_blocking-connect.pkt"
> +		"tcp_blocking_blocking-read.pkt"

Please note that these two tests have "--tolerance_usecs=10000" in their
script. This is overridden by the command line option added above when
KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW is defined: "--tolerance_usecs=14000". But maybe for
these two tests, the tolerance should be even higher than 14000 when
using a debug kernel?

But maybe still better to add them to the XFAIL list and keep the code
as it is.

Acked-by: Matthieu Baerts (NGI0) <matttbe@kernel.org>

>  		"tcp_eor_no-coalesce-retrans.pkt"
>  		"tcp_fast_recovery_prr-ss.*.pkt"
> +		"tcp_sack_sack-route-refresh-ip-tos.pkt"
>  		"tcp_slow_start_slow-start-after-win-update.pkt"
>  		"tcp_timestamping.*.pkt"
>  		"tcp_user_timeout_user-timeout-probe.pkt"
> +		"tcp_zerocopy_cl.*.pkt"
>  		"tcp_zerocopy_epoll_.*.pkt"
>  		"tcp_tcp_info_tcp-info-.*-limited.pkt"
>  	)

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.

Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes

[Willem de Bruijn]

Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Most of the packetdrill tests have not flaked once last week.
> Add the few which did to the XFAIL list.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>

Thanks. I made a note of reviewing these flakes at some point.

Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes

[patchwork-bot+netdevbpf]

Hello:

This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:

On Mon,  9 Jun 2025 17:00:01 -0700 you wrote:
> Most of the packetdrill tests have not flaked once last week.
> Add the few which did to the XFAIL list.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
> CC: shuah@kernel.org
> CC: willemb@google.com
> CC: matttbe@kernel.org
> CC: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [net-next] selftests/net: packetdrill: more xfail changes
    https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/265c6ff0f8c2

You are awesome, thank you!
-- 
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html