From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DEA4C433ED for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 08:22:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C9E4611AC for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 08:22:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231326AbhDOIW7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:22:59 -0400 Received: from void.so ([95.85.17.176]:41074 "EHLO void.so" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231215AbhDOIW6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Apr 2021 04:22:58 -0400 Received: from void.so (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by void.so (Postfix) with ESMTP id F09992ADF5A for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:22:34 +0300 (MSK) Received: from void.so ([127.0.0.1]) by void.so (void.so [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id gYpjUW4-Ke1I for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:22:34 +0300 (MSK) Received: from rnd (unknown [91.244.183.205]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by void.so (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 476742ADF59 for ; Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:22:34 +0300 (MSK) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=void.so; s=mail; t=1618474954; bh=GdHPtaW1+JirtHfDXN+g3afLnhc1ndHodz+XJCt+1+c=; h=Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=PwwcLG9IVxAqv8UrfXZgBUlyD/m2cgz5B+rnxC98EQH2VEcVbvojODFEotmbM70+H quxUHN0FUn+jHHwtazSO7Yjt05vXG7uDa+SSGC1V60AWVnmk/SFESndttverTalBmU BTgbL3TMd7pVorfL37xQcSOrnf7U+ZrKwQoPrlfU= Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2021 11:20:46 +0300 From: Pavel Balaev To: netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next] net: multipath routing: configurable seed Message-ID: References: <08aba836-162e-b5d3-7a93-0488489be798@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Apr 14, 2021 at 08:24:11PM -0700, David Ahern wrote: > On 4/14/21 12:33 AM, Pavel Balaev wrote: > >> > >> This should work the same for IPv6. > > I wanted to add IPv6 support after IPv4 will be approved, > > anyway no problem, will add IPv6 in next version > >> And please add test cases under tools/testing/selftests/net. > > This feature cannot be tested whithin one host instance, becasue the same seed > > will be used by default for all netns, so results will be the same > > anyway, should I use QEMU for this tests? > > > > > > why not make the seed per namespace? In patch seed is maked per namespace. I mean that I cannot check default behaviour whitin one host: sysctl net.ipv4.fib_multipath_hash_seed=random. In this case system random seed will be used (same for all netns, as it was before my patch). We can only test two cases: netns0: net.ipv4.fib_multipath_hash_seed=${SEED_0} netns1: net.ipv4.fib_multipath_hash_seed=${SEED_1} flows direction will not be the same. netns0: net.ipv4.fib_multipath_hash_seed=${SEED_0} netns1: net.ipv4.fib_multipath_hash_seed=${SEED_0} flows direction will be the same. Is this enough?