netdev - Re: TC: selftests: current timeout (45s) is too low

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: Thu, 13 Jul 2023 17:32:06 -0300
From: Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>
To: Matthieu Baerts <matthieu.baerts@...sares.net>,
 Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Anders Roxell
 <anders.roxell@...aro.org>, Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: TC: selftests: current timeout (45s) is too low

On 13/07/2023 16:59, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> Hi Pedro,
> 
> On 13/07/2023 19:30, Pedro Tammela wrote:
>> On 13/07/2023 10:59, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
> 
> (...)
> 
>>> We can see that all tests have been executed except one:
>>>
>>>> # ok 495 6bda - Add tunnel_key action with nofrag option # skipped -
>>>> probe command: test skipped.
>>>
>>> Maybe something else missing?
> 
> Do you think this one can be due to a missing kconfig? This command is
> failing:
> 
>    $TC actions add action tunnel_key help 2>&1 | grep -q nofrag
> 
> Or maybe that's normal, e.g. a feature no longer there?

I know what's happening... more below

> 
>>> Other than that, 6 tests have failed:
> 
> (...)
> 
>> Cool! So it seems we have some tests that bit rotted...
> 
> Who doesn't? :)
> 
>>> I can see that at least "CONFIG_NF_CONNTRACK_PROCFS" kconfig is needed
>>> as well for the 373rd test (adding it seems helping: [5]).
>>>
>>> Not sure about the 5 others, I don't know what these tests are doing, I
>>> came here by accident and I don't think I'm the most appropriated person
>>> to fix that: do you know if someone can look at the 5 other errors? :)
>>
>> We can take a look, thank you.
> 
> Thank you!
> 
>>> I can send patches to fix the timeout + the two missing kconfig if you
>>> want.
>>
>> Yes, please.
> 
> Sure, will do!
> 
>> Could you also do one final test with the following?
>> It will increase the total testing wall time but it's ~time~ we let the
>> bull loose.
> 
> Just did, it took just over 3 minutes (~3:05), see the log file in [1]
> (test job in [2] and build job in [3]).
> 
> Not much longer but 15 more tests failing :)
> Also, 12 new tests have been skipped:
> 
>> Tests using the DEV2 variable must define the name of a physical NIC with the -d option when running tdc.
> But I guess that's normal when executing tdc.sh.
> 

Yep, some tests could require physical hardware, so it's ok to skip those.

As for some of the tests that failed / skipped, it might be because of 
an old iproute2.
I see that's using bookworm as the rootfs, which has the 6.1 iproute2.
Generally tdc should run with the matching iproute2 version although 
it's not really required but rather recommended.
We do have a 'dependsOn' directive to skip in case of mismatches, so 
perhaps it might be necessary to adjust some of these tests.

OTOH, is it possible to have a rootfs which runs the tests in tandem 
with iproute2-next?

Thanks for chasing this! I will let the guys know and we will try to fix 
the test failures.