What you said is reasonable，but it would confuse the test personnel, as there is
no clear reminders. Is it possible to modify it to without SKIP，will give exact
reminders when it is failed?
On 2024/9/6 12:33, Baolu Lu wrote:
On 9/6/24 12:21 PM, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/8/16 21:02, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:43:18PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/7/18 16:27, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Liu, Yi L
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 5:06 PM
@@ -3289,7 +3290,20 @@ static in
On 9/6/24 12:21 PM, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/8/16 21:02, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:43:18PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/7/18 16:27, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Liu, Yi L
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 5:06 PM
@@ -3289,7 +3290,20 @@ static int __iommu_set_group_pasid(struct
iom
On 2024/8/16 21:02, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 05:43:18PM +0800, Yi Liu wrote:
On 2024/7/18 16:27, Tian, Kevin wrote:
From: Liu, Yi L
Sent: Friday, June 28, 2024 5:06 PM
@@ -3289,7 +3290,20 @@ static int __iommu_set_group_pasid(struct
iommu_domain *domain,
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 05 Sep 2024 21:31:55 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > Packetdrill scripts are sensitive to timing.
> > > On the dbg build, I just observe a flaky test.
> > >
> > > The tool takes --tolerance_usecs and --tolerance_percent arguments.
> > > I may have to update ksft
On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 09:03:52PM -0400, Luis Felipe Hernandez wrote:
> Adds test suite for integer based power function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Felipe Hernandez
> ---
> Changes in v3:
> - Fix compiler warning: explicitly define constant as unsigned int
> - Add changes in patch revisions
> Chang
On Thu, 05 Sep 2024 21:31:55 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > Packetdrill scripts are sensitive to timing.
> > On the dbg build, I just observe a flaky test.
> >
> > The tool takes --tolerance_usecs and --tolerance_percent arguments.
> > I may have to update ksft_runner.sh to increase one if a db
Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 23:07:03 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/config
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> > > > +CONFIG_TCP_MD5SIG=y
> > >
> > > Looks like this is not enough:
>
Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 23:07:03 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/config
> > > @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> > > +CONFIG_TCP_MD5SIG=y
> >
> > Looks like this is not enough:
> >
> > # 1..2
> > # open tun device: No
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 23:07:03 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/config
> > @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> > +CONFIG_TCP_MD5SIG=y
>
> Looks like this is not enough:
>
> # 1..2
> # open tun device: No such file or directory
> # not ok 1 ipv4
> #
From: Willem de Bruijn
Lay the groundwork to import into kselftests the over 150 packetdrill
TCP/IP conformance tests on github.com/google/packetdrill.
Florian recently added support for packetdrill tests in nf_conntrack,
in commit a8a388c2aae49 ("selftests: netfilter: add packetdrill based
conn
From: Willem de Bruijn
Support testcases that are themselves not executable, but need an
interpreter to run them.
If a test file is not executable, but an executable file
ksft_runner.sh exists in the TARGET dir, kselftest will run
./ksft_runner.sh ./$BASENAME_TEST
Packetdrill may add hundr
From: Willem de Bruijn
Lay the groundwork to import into kselftests the over 150 packetdrill
TCP/IP conformance tests on github.com/google/packetdrill.
1/2: add kselftest infra for TEST_PROGS that need an interpreter
2/2: add the specific packetdrill tests
Both can go through net-next, I imagi
On Wed, 4 Sep 2024 23:07:03 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/packetdrill/config
> @@ -0,0 +1 @@
> +CONFIG_TCP_MD5SIG=y
Looks like this is not enough:
# 1..2
# open tun device: No such file or directory
# not ok 1 ipv4
# open tun device: No such file or directory
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 9:10 PM Yuan Chen wrote:
>
> From: Yuan Chen
>
> This patch identifies whether a test item is valid by adding a valid flag to
> res.
>
> When we test the bpf_cookies/perf_event sub-test item of test_progs, there is
> a
> probability failure of the test item. In fact, this
With the current API the only way to remove an allowed IP is to
completely rebuild the allowed IPs set for a peer using
WGPEER_F_REPLACE_ALLOWEDIPS. In other words, if my current configuration
is such that a peer has allowed IP IPs 192.168.0.2 and 192.168.0.3 and I
want to remove 192.168.0.2 the ac
On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 12:41 AM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:46 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > > > > Fro
Jason Xing wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:46 PM Willem de Bruijn
> wrote:
> >
> > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > > > From: Jason Xing
> > > > >
> > > > > In the previous patch, we found things could
From: Jason Xing
When I was trying to modify the tx timestamping feature, I found that
running "./txtimestamp -4 -C -L 127.0.0.1" didn't reflect the error:
I succeeded to generate timestamp stored in the skb but later failed
to report it to the userspace (which means failed to put css into cmsg).
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:46 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > > From: Jason Xing
> > > >
> > > > In the previous patch, we found things could happen in the rx software
> > > > times
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 10:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:38 PM Willem de Bruijn
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > > From: Jason Xing
> > > >
> > > > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE is a report flag which passes the
> > > > timestamps g
Jason Xing wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
> wrote:
> >
> > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > From: Jason Xing
> > >
> > > In the previous patch, we found things could happen in the rx software
> > > timestamp. Here, we also noticed that, for rx hardware timestamp case,
> > > it co
Jason Xing wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:38 PM Willem de Bruijn
> wrote:
> >
> > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > From: Jason Xing
> > >
> > > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE is a report flag which passes the
> > > timestamps generated by either SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE or
> > > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:38 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing
> >
> > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE is a report flag which passes the
> > timestamps generated by either SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE or
> > SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE to the userspace all the ti
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing
> >
> > In the previous patch, we found things could happen in the rx software
> > timestamp. Here, we also noticed that, for rx hardware timestamp case,
> > it could happen when one process enables
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 9:37 PM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing
> >
> > introduce a new flag SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER in the receive
> > path. User can set it with SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE to filter
> > out rx software timestamp report, especially after a
Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing
>
> In the previous patch, we found things could happen in the rx software
> timestamp. Here, we also noticed that, for rx hardware timestamp case,
> it could happen when one process enables the rx hardware timestamp
> generating flag first, then another proce
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 7:04 PM Jason Xing wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:16 AM Willem de Bruijn
> wrote:
> >
> > Jason Xing wrote:
> > > From: Jason Xing
> > >
> > > When I was trying to modify the tx timestamping feature, I found that
> > > running "./txtimestamp -4 -C -L 127.0.0.1" didn't
Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing
>
> SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE is a report flag which passes the
> timestamps generated by either SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE or
> SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE to the userspace all the time.
>
> So let us revise the doc here.
>
> Suggested-by: Willem de
Jason Xing wrote:
> From: Jason Xing
>
> introduce a new flag SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER in the receive
> path. User can set it with SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE to filter
> out rx software timestamp report, especially after a process turns on
> netstamp_needed_key which can time stamp every inc
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 5:16 AM Willem de Bruijn
wrote:
>
> Jason Xing wrote:
> > From: Jason Xing
> >
> > When I was trying to modify the tx timestamping feature, I found that
> > running "./txtimestamp -4 -C -L 127.0.0.1" didn't reflect the fact
> > properly.
>
> Did not reflect what fact? Sorry
On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 05:17:58PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 01:55:03PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 12:43:02PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > > Right, there's quite a lot I need to do:
> > >
> > > - Uncorrupt your patches
> > > - Fix the conflict i
On Thu, Sep 5, 2024 at 3:18 PM Jason Xing wrote:
>
> From: Jason Xing
>
> Test when we use SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER with software
> or hardware report flag. The expected result is no rx timestamp
> report.
>
> Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn
> Signed-off-by: Jason Xing
> ---
> tools/testin
From: Jason Xing
Test when we use SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER with software
or hardware report flag. The expected result is no rx timestamp
report.
Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn
Signed-off-by: Jason Xing
---
tools/testing/selftests/net/rxtimestamp.c | 11 +++
1 file changed, 11 ins
From: Jason Xing
In the previous patch, we found things could happen in the rx software
timestamp. Here, we also noticed that, for rx hardware timestamp case,
it could happen when one process enables the rx hardware timestamp
generating flag first, then another process only setting
SOF_TIMESTAMPI
From: Jason Xing
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RAW_HARDWARE is a report flag which passes the
timestamps generated by either SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_HARDWARE or
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_HARDWARE to the userspace all the time.
So let us revise the doc here.
Suggested-by: Willem de Bruijn
Signed-off-by: Jason Xing
-
From: Jason Xing
introduce a new flag SOF_TIMESTAMPING_OPT_RX_FILTER in the receive
path. User can set it with SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE to filter
out rx software timestamp report, especially after a process turns on
netstamp_needed_key which can time stamp every incoming skb.
Previously, we fou
From: Jason Xing
When one socket is set SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_SOFTWARE which means the
whole system turns on the netstamp_needed_key button, other sockets
that only have SOF_TIMESTAMPING_SOFTWARE will be affected and then
print the rx timestamp information even without setting
SOF_TIMESTAMPING_RX_S
38 matches
Mail list logo
