netdev - Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: add config fragment CONFIG_NF_NAT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:49:48 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     daniel@...earbox.net, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: add config fragment CONFIG_NF_NAT_IPV6

Hi,

On Thu, 2018-11-29 at 15:01 +0530, Naresh Kamboju wrote:
> CONFIG_NF_NAT_IPV6=y is required for bpf test_sockmap test case
> Fixes,
> ip6tables v1.6.1: can't initialize ip6tables table `nat': Table does
> not exist
> 
> Signed-off-by: Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> index 37f947ec44ed..d7076cf04a9d 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> @@ -23,3 +23,4 @@ CONFIG_LWTUNNEL=y
>  CONFIG_BPF_STREAM_PARSER=y
>  CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS=y
>  CONFIG_FTRACE_SYSCALLS=y
> +CONFIG_NF_NAT_IPV6=y

AFAIK, the selftest Kconfig infra does not pull dependant CONFIG items 
('depends on '...) automatically: if the bpf test_sockmap test needs
CONFIG_NF_NAT_IPV6, you should also include non trivial chain of deps
up to whatever is currently explicitly requested.

On the other side, the self-tests already pull CONFIG_NF_NAT_IPV6=m for
'net' related tests, so if you run:

make kselftest-merge

before compiling the kernel for self-tests (which is AFAIK a mandatory
step) you should not get the reported error. Did you performed the
above step?

Cheers,

Paolo