netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 00/38] Conver all net selftests to run in unique namespace

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: Sun, 26 Nov 2023 19:42:36 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski
 <kuba@...nel.org>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Po-Hsu Lin <po-hsu.lin@...onical.com>,
 Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>, Björn Töpel
 <bjorn@...osinc.com>, Ryan Roberts <ryan.roberts@....com>,
 Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
 Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/38] Conver all net selftests to run in unique
 namespace

On 11/24/23 2:26 AM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> As Guillaume pointed, many selftests create namespaces with very common
> names (like "client" or "server") or even (partially) run directly in init_net.
> This makes these tests prone to failure if another namespace with the same
> name already exists. It also makes it impossible to run several instances
> of these tests in parallel.
> 
> This patch set conver all the net selftests to run in unique namespace,
> so we can update the selftest freamwork to run all tests in it's own namespace
> in parallel. After update, we only need to wait for the test which need
> longest time.
> 
> ]# per_test_logging=1 time ./run_kselftest.sh -n -c net
> TAP version 13
> # selftests: net: reuseport_bpf_numa
> not ok 3 selftests: net: reuseport_bpf_numa # exit=1
> # selftests: net: reuseport_bpf_cpu
> not ok 2 selftests: net: reuseport_bpf_cpu # exit=1
> # selftests: net: reuseport_dualstack
> not ok 4 selftests: net: reuseport_dualstack # exit=1
> # selftests: net: reuseaddr_conflict
> ok 5 selftests: net: reuseaddr_conflict
> 
> ...
> 
> # selftests: net: test_vxlan_mdb.sh
> ok 90 selftests: net: test_vxlan_mdb.sh
> # selftests: net: fib_nexthops.sh
> not ok 41 selftests: net: fib_nexthops.sh # exit=1
> # selftests: net: fcnal-test.sh
> not ok 36 selftests: net: fcnal-test.sh # exit=1
> 
> real    55m1.238s
> user    12m10.350s
> sys     22m17.432s
> 
> 

I have not looked at the details of each script change, but as long as
not test is broken by the change I am fine with the intent.

Acked-by: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>