On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 07:01:59PM +0200, Petr Machata wrote: > > Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Use a less populated IP range to run the tests, as suggested by Petr in > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/87ikvukv3s.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx/. > > > > Suggested-by: Petr Machata <petrm@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh | 4 ++-- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh > > index 06021b2059b7..4ad1e216c6b0 100755 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh > > @@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ SCRIPTDIR=$(dirname "$(readlink -e "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")") > > > > # Simple script to test dynamic targets in netconsole > > SRCIF="" # to be populated later > > -SRCIP=192.168.1.1 > > +SRCIP=192.168.2.1 > > I mentioned 192.0.2.0/24, which we commonly use in selftests. The range > is meant for examples and documentation, which is not exactly selftests, > but feels like it's not bending the rules too far. And we shouldn't see > the range in the wild. True, my mistake. I will update it to 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.2.2.
