On 3/26/22 10:04 AM, 范开喜 wrote:
Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> 于2022年3月26日周六 00:41写道：
On 3/22/22 8:42 AM, fankaixi.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
From: "kaixi.fan" <fankaixi.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Vxlan tunnel is chosen to test bpf code could configure tunnel
source ipv4 address.
The added test configures tunnel source ipv4 address.
>It's sufficient to prove that other types
tunnels could also do it.
Could you be more specific what other types will also use source ipv4
address. It is too vague to claim "it's sufficient to prove ...".
Is it better to add more test cases for other types of ip tunnels ? It would
introduce more duplicate codes.
In the kernel, this is referred to as collect metadata mode as follows:
https://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man8/ip-link.8.html
Kernel use "struct ip_tunnel_info" to save tunnel parameters, and use
it for tunnel encapsulation. The process is similar for vxlan, gre,/gretap,
geneve, ipip and erspan tunnels.
The previous test cases in "test_tunnel.sh" test this mechanism for bpf
program code already. Based on this mechanism, I just use vxlan tunnel
to test tunnel source ip configuration.
You can just mention something like:
Other type of tunnels, e.g., gre, gretap, geneve, ipip, erspan, etc,
can also configure tunnel source ip addresses.
In the vxlan tunnel testcase, two underlay ipv4 addresses
are configured on veth device in root namespace. Test bpf kernel
code would configure the secondary ipv4 address as the tunnel
source ip.
Signed-off-by: kaixi.fan <fankaixi.li@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Again, please use proper name in Signed-off-by tag.
Thanks. I will fix it.
[...]
