[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e6060eae34e41ea29c651bd25d51632d8d52498a.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 19:31:20 +0100
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Jakub Kicinski
<kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "netdev-driver-reviewers@...r.kernel.org"
<netdev-driver-reviewers@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [ANN] net-next is OPEN
On Wed, 2024-01-24 at 13:23 -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 12:42:46 -0500 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > Here's a more handy link filtered down to failures (clicking on
> > > > the test counts links here):
> > > >
> > > > https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/contest.html?branch=net-next-2024-01-24--15-00&executor=vmksft-net-mp&pass=0
> > > >
> > > > I have been attributing the udpg[rs]o and timestamp tests to you,
> > > > but I haven't actually checked.. are they not yours? :)
> > >
> > > I just looked at the result file and assumed 0 meant fine. Oops.
> >
> > Sorry about the confusion there, make run_tests apparently always
> > returns 0 and the result file holds the exit code :( It could be
> > improved by I figured, as long as the JSON output is correct, investing
> > the time in the web UI is probably a better choice than massaging
> > the output files.
>
> Absolutely. My bad for jumping to conclusions.
Some tests are failing because they need an xdp program build under the
ebpf directory.
Since such program is used even by ebpf tests, I'll send a patch
duplicating it under net, and using the existing rule for nat6to4 to
build it.
Cheers,
Paolo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists