netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftests: net: add YNL test framework

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aQQVYU1u3CCyH8lQ@fedora>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 01:48:17 +0000
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Jan Stancek <jstancek@...hat.com>,
	"Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)" <matttbe@...nel.org>,
	Asbjørn Sloth Tønnesen <ast@...erby.net>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	Ido Schimmel <idosch@...dia.com>,
	Guillaume Nault <gnault@...hat.com>,
	Petr Machata <petrm@...dia.com>, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] selftests: net: add YNL test framework

On Thu, Oct 30, 2025 at 08:39:44AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 30 Oct 2025 06:00:24 +0000 Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > > Hm, my knee-jerk reaction was that we should avoid adding too much ynl
> > > stuff to the kernel at this point. But looking closer it's not that
> > > long.
> > > 
> > > Do I understand correctly, tho, that you're testing _system_ YNL?
> > > Not what's in tree?  
> > 
> > Kind of. With this we can test both the system's YNL and also make sure the
> > YNL interface has no regression.
> 
> Meaning we still test the spec, right?

I just do `make install` in tools/net/ynl. Both the ynl scripts and specs are
installed. So I think the specs are also tested.
> 
> To state the obvious ideally we'd test both the specs and the Python
> tools. Strictly better, and without it adding tests for new Python
> features will be a little annoying for people running the selftest.

Yes

> Maybe the solution is as simple as finding and alias'ing ynl to the
> cli.py ?

I didn't get here. The `ynl` calls pyynl.cli:main, that should be enough.
Do you mean we should find the `cli.py` path and call it like
`$source_code/tools/net/ynl/pyynl/cli.py --spec
$source_code/Documentation/netlink/specs/xxx.yaml ...`?

Thanks
Hangbin