netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 6/6] selftests: net: Test for the IOAM insertion with IPv6

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]

Message-ID: <423321698.25016549.1626977577261.JavaMail.zimbra@uliege.be>
Date:   Thu, 22 Jul 2021 20:12:57 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Justin Iurman <justin.iurman@...ege.be>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, dsahern@...nel.org, tom@...bertland.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 6/6] selftests: net: Test for the IOAM
 insertion with IPv6

>> +run()
>> +{
>> +  echo -n "IOAM test... "
>> +
>> +  ip netns exec ioam-node-alpha ping6 -c 5 -W 1 db02::2 &>/dev/null
>> +  if [ $? != 0 ]; then
>> +    echo "FAILED"
>> +    cleanup &>/dev/null
>> +    exit 0
>> +  fi
>> +
>> +  ip netns exec ioam-node-gamma ./ioam6_parser veth0 2 ${IOAM_NAMESPACE}
>> ${IOAM_TRACE_TYPE} 64 ${ALPHA[0]} ${ALPHA[1]} ${ALPHA[2]} ${ALPHA[3]}
>> ${ALPHA[4]} ${ALPHA[5]} ${ALPHA[6]} ${ALPHA[7]} ${ALPHA[8]} "${ALPHA[9]}" 63
>> ${BETA[0]} ${BETA[1]} ${BETA[2]} ${BETA[3]} ${BETA[4]} ${BETA[5]} ${BETA[6]}
>> ${BETA[7]} ${BETA[8]} &
>> +
>> +  local spid=$!
>> +  sleep 0.1
>> +
>> +  ip netns exec ioam-node-alpha ping6 -c 5 -W 1 db02::2 &>/dev/null
>> +
>> +  wait $spid
>> +  [ $? = 0 ] && echo "PASSED" || echo "FAILED"
>> +}
>> +
>> +cleanup &>/dev/null
>> +setup
>> +run
>> +cleanup &>/dev/null
> 
> Can you add negative tests as well? i.e, things work like they should
> when enabled and configured properly, fail when the test should not and
> include any invalid combinations of parameters.

Hmmm... I think I got your point but not sure on details you have in mind. Maybe should we take a table during the netdev conf and discuss it live.