netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 8/8] selftests/bpf: introduce XDP compliance test tool

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]

Date:   Fri, 27 Jan 2023 18:58:28 +0100
From:   Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>
To:     Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        andrii@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
        hawk@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
        memxor@...il.com, alardam@...il.com, saeedm@...dia.com,
        anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com, gospo@...adcom.com,
        vladimir.oltean@....com, nbd@....name, john@...ozen.org,
        leon@...nel.org, simon.horman@...igine.com, aelior@...vell.com,
        christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr, ecree.xilinx@...il.com,
        mst@...hat.com, bjorn@...nel.org, magnus.karlsson@...el.com,
        maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
        lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com, martin.lau@...ux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 8/8] selftests/bpf: introduce XDP compliance
 test tool

On Jan 27, Toke wrote:
> Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> writes:
> 
> >> > > +
> >> > > +   ctrl_sockfd = accept(sockfd, (struct sockaddr *)&ctrl_addr, &len);
> >> > > +   if (ctrl_sockfd < 0) {
> >> > > +           fprintf(stderr, "Failed to accept connection on DUT socket\n");
> >> > > +           close(sockfd);
> >> > > +           return -errno;
> >> > > +   }
> >> > > +
> >>
> >> [...]
> >>
> >> >
> >> > There is also connect_to_fd, maybe we can use that? It should take
> >> > care of the timeouts.. (requires plumbing server_fd, not sure whether
> >> > it's a problem or not)
> >>
> >> please correct me if I am wrong, but in order to have server_fd it is mandatory
> >> both tester and DUT are running on the same process, right? Here, I guess 99% of
> >> the times DUT and tester will run on two separated devices. Agree?
> >
> > Yes, it's targeting more the case where you have a server fd and a
> > bunch of clients in the same process. But I think it's still usable in
> > your case, you're not using fork() anywhere afaict, so even if these
> > are separate devices, connect_to_fd should still work. (unless I'm
> > missing something, haven't looked too closely)
> 
> Just to add a bit of context here, "separate devices" can refer to the
> hosts as well as the netdevs. I.e., it should also be possible to run
> this in a mode where the client bit runs on a different physical machine
> than the server bit (as it will not be feasible in any case to connect
> things with loopback cables).

yes, this is what I meant with 'DUT and tester will run on two separated
devices' (sorry to have not been so clear). Looking at the code server_fd
is always obtained from start_server(), while here the client on the tester
just knows the IPv4/IPv6 address and the port of the server running on the DUT.

Regards,
Lorenzo

> 
> -Toke
> 

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)