From: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, magnus.karlsson@intel.com,
stfomichev@gmail.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
horms@kernel.org, larysa.zaremba@intel.com,
aleksander.lobakin@intel.com, bjorn@kernel.org,
Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Subject: [PATCH v5 net 06/11] selftests: bpf: fix pkt grow tests
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2026 17:02:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260331150213.550797-7-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260331150213.550797-1-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Skip tail adjust tests in xskxceiver for SKB mode as it is not very
friendly for it. multi-buffer case does not work as xdp_rxq_info that is
registered for generic XDP does not report ::frag_size. The non-mbuf
path copies packet via skb_pp_cow_data() which only accounts for
headroom, leaving us with no tailroom and causing underlying XDP prog to
drop packets therefore.
For multi-buffer test on other modes, change the amount of bytes we use
for growth, assume worst-case scenario and take care of headroom and
tailroom.
Reviewed-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
index 62118ffba661..ee60bcc22ee4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
@@ -2528,16 +2528,34 @@ int testapp_adjust_tail_shrink_mb(struct test_spec *test)
int testapp_adjust_tail_grow(struct test_spec *test)
{
+ if (test->mode == TEST_MODE_SKB)
+ return TEST_SKIP;
+
/* Grow by 4 bytes for testing purpose */
return testapp_adjust_tail(test, 4, MIN_PKT_SIZE * 2);
}
int testapp_adjust_tail_grow_mb(struct test_spec *test)
{
+ u32 grow_size;
+
+ if (test->mode == TEST_MODE_SKB)
+ return TEST_SKIP;
+
+ /* worst case scenario is when underlying setup will work on 3k
+ * buffers, let us account for it; given that we will use 6k as
+ * pkt_len, expect that it will be broken down to 2 descs each
+ * with 3k payload;
+ *
+ * 4k is truesize, 3k payload, 256 HR, 320 TR;
+ */
+ grow_size = XSK_UMEM__MAX_FRAME_SIZE -
+ XSK_UMEM__LARGE_FRAME_SIZE -
+ XDP_PACKET_HEADROOM -
+ test->ifobj_tx->umem_tailroom;
test->mtu = MAX_ETH_JUMBO_SIZE;
- /* Grow by (frag_size - last_frag_Size) - 1 to stay inside the last fragment */
- return testapp_adjust_tail(test, (XSK_UMEM__MAX_FRAME_SIZE / 2) - 1,
- XSK_UMEM__LARGE_FRAME_SIZE * 2);
+
+ return testapp_adjust_tail(test, grow_size, XSK_UMEM__LARGE_FRAME_SIZE * 2);
}
int testapp_tx_queue_consumer(struct test_spec *test)
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-31 15:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-31 15:02 [PATCH v5 net 00/11] xsk: tailroom reservation and MTU validation Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 01/11] xsk: tighten UMEM headroom validation to account for tailroom and min frame Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 02/11] xsk: respect tailroom for ZC setups Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 03/11] xsk: fix XDP_UMEM_SG_FLAG issues Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 04/11] xsk: validate MTU against usable frame size on bind Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 05/11] selftests: bpf: introduce a common routine for reading procfs Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` Maciej Fijalkowski [this message]
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 07/11] selftests: bpf: have a separate variable for drop test Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 08/11] selftests: bpf: adjust rx_dropped xskxceiver's test to respect tailroom Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 09/11] idpf: remove xsk frame size check against alignment Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 10/11] igc: remove home-grown xsk's frame size validation Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-03-31 15:02 ` [PATCH v5 net 11/11] gve: " Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-04-02 11:12 ` [PATCH v5 net 00/11] xsk: tailroom reservation and MTU validation Maciej Fijalkowski
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=20260331150213.550797-7-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--to=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=aleksander.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=bjorn@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=larysa.zaremba@intel.com \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=stfomichev@gmail.com \
/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