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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EE4CCDB474 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 13:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235019AbjJQN64 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2023 09:58:56 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51982 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1343571AbjJQN6t (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Oct 2023 09:58:49 -0400 Received: from ganesha.gnumonks.org (ganesha.gnumonks.org [IPv6:2001:780:45:1d:225:90ff:fe52:c662]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 91D4FF0 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 06:58:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [78.30.34.192] (port=33176 helo=gnumonks.org) by ganesha.gnumonks.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qskao-005rC8-HG; Tue, 17 Oct 2023 15:58:44 +0200 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2023 15:58:41 +0200 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso To: Thomas Haller Cc: NetFilter Subject: Re: [PATCH nft v2 2/3] tests/shell: skip "table_onoff" test on older kernels Message-ID: References: <20231017085133.1203402-1-thaller@redhat.com> <20231017085133.1203402-3-thaller@redhat.com> <5a785173b19c30e64ffa96e491f16757e7a4b21e.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <5a785173b19c30e64ffa96e491f16757e7a4b21e.camel@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 02:43:56PM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Tue, 2023-10-17 at 13:40 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 01:21:54PM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > > > On Tue, 2023-10-17 at 11:04 +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 17, 2023 at 10:49:07AM +0200, Thomas Haller wrote: > > > > > The "table_onoff" test can only pass with certain (recent) > > > > > kernels. > > > > > Conditionally exit with status 77, if "eval-exit-code" > > > > > determines > > > > > that > > > > > we don't have a suitable kernel version. > > > > > > > > > > In this case, we can find the fixes in: > > > > > > > > > >  v6.6      : > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c9bd26513b3a11b3adb3c2ed8a31a01a87173ff1 > > > > >  v6.5.6    : > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=5e5754e9e77ce400d70ff3c30fea466c8dfe9a9f > > > > >  v6.1.56   : > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c4b0facd5c20ceae3d07018a3417f06302fa9cd1 > > > > >  v5.15.135 : > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=0dcc9b4097d860d9af52db5366a8755c13468d13 > > > > > > > > I am not sure it worth this level of tracking. > > > > > > > > Soon these patches will be in upstream stable and this extra > > > > shell > > > > code will be simply deadcode in little time. > > > > > > I am not concerned about dead code in old tests that keep passing. > > > The code was useful once, now the test passes. No need to revisit > > > them, > > > unless you see a real problem with them. > > > > > > If it would be only little time, the tests should wait. But how > > > much is > > > the right time? You are not waiting for your use-case, you are > > > holding > > > back to not to break the unknown use cases of others. > > > > > > IMO merging tests is good. The problem just needs a good solution. > > > > Apologies, I don't think this kind of hints is worth. > > > Which hint do you mean? > > Do you mean the commit message, or the > > echo "Command to re-awaken a dormant table did not fail. Lacking https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=c9bd26513b3a11b3adb3c2ed8a31a01a87173ff1 ?" > > The echo is really just an elaborate code-comment. But it also ends up > in "testout.log", which makes it better. > > > I don't mind rewording commit message or the echo statement (or even > dropping it entirely). But I find this information more useful than > not. But I still don't get the point on skipping this test in older kernels, this test tells you your kernel is buggy. Who is going to run this in older kernels? We only run these tests these days. Skipping a test that tells you that you kernel is buggy is misleading?