[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240209111730.5e67d9ac@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 11:17:30 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan
<shuah@...nel.org>, Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] selftests: net: wait for receiver startup in
so_txtime.sh
On Fri, 09 Feb 2024 17:45:28 +0100 Paolo Abeni wrote:
> But I'm pretty sure that even with that there will be sporadic failures
> in slow enough environments.
>
> When the host-induced jitter/delay is high enough, packets are dropped
> and there are functional failures. I'm wondering if we should skip this
> test entirely when KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW=yes.
By skip do you mean the same approach as to the gro test?
Ignore errors? Because keeping the code coverage for KASAN etc.
would still be good (stating the obvious, sorry).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists