netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V6 2/5] selftests: drv-net: Test XDP

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: <20250721133325.73e2f076@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 13:33:25 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>
Cc: Nimrod Oren <noren@...dia.com>, Mohsin Bashir <mohsin.bashr@...il.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, shuah@...nel.org, horms@...nel.org,
 cratiu@...dia.com, cjubran@...dia.com, mbloch@...dia.com,
 jdamato@...tly.com, sdf@...ichev.me, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
 hawk@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, nathan@...nel.org,
 nick.desaulniers+lkml@...il.com, morbo@...gle.com, justinstitt@...gle.com,
 bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
 tariqt@...dia.com, thoiland@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V6 2/5] selftests: drv-net: Test XDP_PASS/DROP
 support

IOn Mon, 21 Jul 2025 21:34:05 +0300 Gal Pressman wrote:
> > That's a reasonable way to modify the test. But I'm not sure it's
> > something that should be blocking merging the patches.
> > Or for that matter whether it's Mohsin's responsibility to make the
> > test cater to quirks of mlx5,   
> 
> Definitely not a quirk, you cannot assume the headers are in the linear
> part, especially if you're going to put this program as reference in the
> kernel tree.
> 
> This issue has nothing to do with mlx5, but a buggy XDP program.

We put the tests in the tree to foster collaboration. If you think the
test should be improved please send patches. I don't think the kernel
will allow pulling headers if they are not in the linear section.
But that's your problem to solve.

> > which is not even part of NIPA testing -
> > we have no way of knowing what passes for mlx5, what regresses it etc.  
> 
> People have been developing XDP code that runs on mlx5 long before NIPA
> even existed 🤷‍♂️..
> And as you know we run these selftests on mlx5 hardware, as evident by
> Nimrod's mail, and others you've seen on the list. You know what regresses.

No, please don't try to dispute facts. It's not integrated, if you go
on a vacation upstream will have no idea what broke in mlx5. Either you
are reporting the results upstream or our guarantees on regressions are
best effort. BTW I don't understand how you can claim that a new test
regresses something. It never passed on mlx5 == not a regression.