On Thu, 26 Jan 2023 10:01:44 +0000 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
> On 23/01/25 11:08PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 25 Jan 2023 21:13:49 +0000 Andrei Gherzan wrote:
> > > The udpgro_frglist.sh uses nat6to4.o which is tested for existence in
> > > bpf/nat6to4.o (relative to the script). This is where the object is
> > > compiled. Even so, the script attempts to use it as part of tc with a
> > > different path (../bpf/nat6to4.o). As a consequence, this fails the script:
> >
> > Is this a recent regression? Can you add a Fixes tag?
>
> This issue seems to be included from the beginning (edae34a3ed92). I can't say
> why this was not seen before upstream but on our side, this test was disabled
> internally due to lack of CC support in BPF programs. This was fixed in the
> meanwhile in 837a3d66d698 (selftests: net: Add cross-compilation support for
> BPF programs) and we found this issue while trying to reenable the test.
>
> So if you think that is reasonable, I could add a Fixes tag for the initial
> script commit edae34a3ed92 (selftests net: add UDP GRO fraglist + bpf
> self-tests) and push a v3.
We have queued commit 3c107f36db06 ("selftests/net: mv bpf/nat6to4.c
to net folder") in net-next, I think that should fix it, too?
> > What tree did you base this patch on? Doesn't seem to apply
>
> The patches were done on top of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git, the master
> branch - 948ef7bb70c4 (Merge tag 'modules-6.2-rc6' of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mcgrof/linux). There is another
> merge that happened in the meanwhile but the rebase works without issues. I can
> send a rebased v3 if needed.
Could you try linux-next or net-next ?
