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 B7B17C4332F for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 17:06:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229475AbjKBRGn (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2023 13:06:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53756 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229581AbjKBRGm (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Nov 2023 13:06:42 -0400 Received: from orbyte.nwl.cc (orbyte.nwl.cc [IPv6:2001:41d0:e:133a::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7072D12F for ; Thu, 2 Nov 2023 10:06:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from n0-1 by orbyte.nwl.cc with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1qyb9O-0007Ga-UF; Thu, 02 Nov 2023 18:06:34 +0100 Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2023 18:06:34 +0100 From: Phil Sutter To: Thomas Haller Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [nft PATCH] tests: shell: Fix sets/reset_command_0 for current kernels Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Phil Sutter , Thomas Haller , Pablo Neira Ayuso , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org References: <20231102150342.3543-1-phil@nwl.cc> <08a7ddd943c17548bbe4a72d6c0aae3110b0d39e.camel@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <08a7ddd943c17548bbe4a72d6c0aae3110b0d39e.camel@redhat.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Nov 02, 2023 at 04:29:34PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote: > On Thu, 2023-11-02 at 16:03 +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > >   > > +# Note: Element expiry is no longer reset since kernel commit > > 4c90bba60c26 > > +# ("netfilter: nf_tables: do not refresh timeout when resetting > > element"), > > +# the respective parts of the test have therefore been commented > > out. > > Hi Phil, > > do you expect that the old behavior ever comes back? A recent nfbz comment[1] from Pablo made me doubt the decision is final, though I may have misread it. > Why keep the old checks (commented out)? Maybe drop them? We can get it > from git history. Should the change be permanent, one should change the tests to assert the opposite, namely that expires values are unaffected by the reset. > If you think something is still unclear without them, then instead > elaborate further in the code comment (thanks for adding a code comment > in the first place, very useful). Cheers, Phil