netdev - Re: [TEST] The no-kvm CI instances going away

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]

Message-ID: <2d0eb4ef-dd07-4800-8fcf-637a924570fa@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2024 10:44:14 +0100
From: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
 MPTCP Upstream <mptcp@...ts.linux.dev>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [TEST] The no-kvm CI instances going away

Hi Jakub,

On 07/02/2024 02:44, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Tue, 6 Feb 2024 12:16:43 +0100 Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>> Hi Jakub,
>>
>> On 06/02/2024 02:41, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>> because cloud computing is expensive I'm shutting down the instances
>>> which were running without KVM support. We're left with the KVM-enabled
>>> instances only (metal) - one normal and one with debug configs enabled.  
>>
>> Thank you for the notification!
>>
>> It sounds like good news if the non-support of KVM was causing issues :)
>>
>> I think we can then no longer ignore the two MPTCP tests that were
>> unstable in the previous environment.
>>
>> The results from the different tests running on the -dbg instances don't
>> look good. Maybe some debug kconfig have a too big impact? [1]
> 
> Sorry, I'm behind on the reading the list. FWIW if you want to reach me
> quickly make sure the To: doesn't include anyone else. That gets sorted
> to a higher prio folder :S

Sorry, there was no urgency, I only wanted to add a link to the previous
discussion for those who wanted more details about that.

Thank you for the note!

>> For MPTCP, one test always hits the selftest timeout [2] when using a
>> debug kconfig. I don't know what to do in this case: if we need to set a
>> timeout value that is supported by debug environments, the value will be
>> so high, it will no longer catch issues "early enough" in "normal"
>> environments.
>> Or could it be possible to ignore or double the timeout value in this
>> debug environment?
>>
>> Also, what is the plan with this debug env? It looks like the results
>> are not reported to patchwork for the moment. Maybe only "important"
>> issues, like kernel warnings, could be reported? Failed tests could be
>> reported as "Warning" instead of "Fail"?
> 
> Unfortunately I'm really behind on my "real job". I don't have a clear
> plan. I think we should scale the timeout by 2x or so, but I haven't
> looked how to do that.

No hurry, I understand.

It is not clear to me how the patches you add on top of the ones from
patchwork are managed. Then, I don't know if it can help, but on the
debug instance, this command could be launched before starting the tests
to double the timeout values in all the "net" selftests:

  $ find tools/testing/selftests/net -name settings -print0 | xargs -0 \
       awk -i inplace -F '=' \
           '{if ($1 == "timeout") { print $1 "=" $2*2 } else { print }}'

> I wish the selftest subsystem had some basic guidance.

Me too :)

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.