netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/2] selftests: udpgro: report error when receive failed

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Zry9RKcdRbJZ_rxn@Laptop-X1>
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2024 22:20:52 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
	Ignat Korchagin <ignat@...udflare.com>,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] selftests: udpgro: report error when receive
 failed

On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 12:19:22PM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgro.sh
> > @@ -49,14 +49,15 @@ run_one() {
> >   	cfg_veth
> > -	ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx -C 1000 -R 10 ${rx_args} && \
> > -		echo "ok" || \
> > -		echo "failed" &
> > +	ip netns exec "${PEER_NS}" ./udpgso_bench_rx -C 1000 -R 10 ${rx_args} &
> > +	local PID1=$!
> >   	wait_local_port_listen ${PEER_NS} 8000 udp
> >   	./udpgso_bench_tx ${tx_args}
> > -	ret=$?
> > -	wait $(jobs -p)
> > +	check_err $?
> > +	wait ${PID1}
> > +	check_err $?
> > +	[ "$ret" -eq 0 ] && echo "ok" || echo "failed"
> 
> I think that with the above, in case of a failure, every test after the
> failing one will should fail, regardless of the actual results, am I
> correct?

No, only the failed test echo "failed". The passed tests still
report "ok". The "check_err $?" in run_all function only record none 0
ret as return value.

Thanks
Hangbin