netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests: bpf: add VRF test cases to lwt_ip

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

Message-ID: <cd8f31de-aaae-db13-4755-400f5d335b2f@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Apr 2019 22:04:34 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Peter Oskolkov <posk@...k.io>
Cc:     Peter Oskolkov <posk@...gle.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests: bpf: add VRF test cases to
 lwt_ip_encap test.

On 4/10/19 9:38 PM, Peter Oskolkov wrote:
>>
>> Notice the "No route to host" errors.
> 
> "No route to host" is OK: there are negative tests, as you requested a
> couple of months ago... :), and these tests correctly trigger "no
> route to host".
> 
> This output basically tell me that the test passes, both with and without VRF.

ok, expected errors like that should be trapped and hidden. I can barely
remember what I had for breakfast yesterday, let alone that errors like
this are ok months after the initial test submission.

Again, I reference what I did for fib_tests as an example of how I think
tests should be written: 1 line per test with OK/FAIL at the end of the
line, expected errors trapped so a clean runs shows only clean output,
verbose option and pause-on-fail option to help diagnose errors when a
test breaks.

...

>> ###
>>
>> so netcat is not the right package. 'apt-cache search netcat' shows
>> another package, so try it.
> 
> I guess Debian Stretch has a too old version of netcat that does not
> support the flags used in the test.

I don't have recent Fedora VMs setup to run these tests, but within
reason they should work across OS versions (reason to me being widely
used OS'es like Debian, Fedora and Ubuntu).