Re: [patch net-next 3/6] selftests: forwarding: add ability to assemble NETIFS array by driver name

[Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>]

Sun, Apr 14, 2024 at 09:32:46PM CEST, benjamin.poirier@gmail.com wrote:
>On 2024-04-13 15:27 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 10:38:30PM CEST, benjamin.poirier@gmail.com wrote:
>> >On 2024-04-12 17:13 +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>
>> >> 
>> >> Allow driver tests to work without specifying the netdevice names.
>> >> Introduce a possibility to search for available netdevices according to
>> >> set driver name. Allow test to specify the name by setting
>> >> NETIF_FIND_DRIVER variable.
>> >> 
>> >> Note that user overrides this either by passing netdevice names on the
>> >> command line or by declaring NETIFS array in custom forwarding.config
>> >> configuration file.
>> >> 
>> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@nvidia.com>
>> >> ---
>> >>  tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh | 39 +++++++++++++++++++
>> >>  1 file changed, 39 insertions(+)
>> >> 
>> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh
>> >> index 6f6a0f13465f..06633518b3aa 100644
>> >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh
>> >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/forwarding/lib.sh
>> >> @@ -55,6 +55,9 @@ declare -A NETIFS=(
>> >>  : "${NETIF_CREATE:=yes}"
>> >>  : "${NETIF_TYPE:=veth}"
>> >>  
>> >> +# Whether to find netdevice according to the specified driver.
>> >> +: "${NETIF_FIND_DRIVER:=}"
>> >> +
>> >
>> >This section of the file sets default values for variables that can be
>> >set by users in forwarding.config. NETIF_FIND_DRIVER is more like
>> >NUM_NETIFS, it is set by tests, so I don't think it should be listed
>> >there.
>> 
>> Well, currently there is a mixture of config variables and test
>> definitions/requirements. For example REQUIRE_JQ, REQUIRE_MZ, REQUIRE_MTOOLS
>> are not forwarding.config configurable (they are, they should not be ;))
>
>Yes, that's true. If you prefer to leave that statement there, go ahead.
>
>> Where do you suggest to move NETIF_FIND_DRIVER?
>
>I would make NETIF_FIND_DRIVER like NUM_NETIFS, ie. there's no statement
>setting a default value for it. And I would move the comment describing
>its purpose above this new part:

Ok.

>
>> +
>> +if [[ ! -z $NETIF_FIND_DRIVER ]]; then
>> +	unset NETIFS
>> +	declare -A NETIFS
>> +	find_netif
>> +fi
>> +
>
>BTW, '! -z' can be removed from that test. It's equivalent to:
>if [[ $NETIF_FIND_DRIVER ]]; then

Ok.