On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:00:38PM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > On 02/11, Joe Damato wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 09:45:56AM -0800, Joe Damato wrote: > > > On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 12:09:50PM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > > > On 2/10/25 8:38 PM, Joe Damato wrote: [...] > > > > > > > > This causes self-test failures: > > > > > > > > https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-net-drv/results/987742/4-queues-py/stdout > > > > > > > > but I really haven't done any real investigation here. > > > > > > I think it's because the test kernel in this case has > > > CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS undefined [1]. > > > > > > The error printed in the link you mentioned: > > > > > > socket creation failed: Address family not supported by protocol > > > > > > is coming from the C program, which fails to create the AF_XDP > > > socket. > > > > > > I think the immediate reaction is to add more error checking to the > > > python to make sure that the subprocess succeeded and if it failed, > > > skip. > > > > > > But, we may want it to fail for other error states instead of > > > skipping? Not sure if there's general guidance on this, but my plan > > > was to have the AF_XDP socket creation failure return a different > > > error code (I dunno maybe -1?) and only skip the test in that case. > > > > > > Will that work or is there a better way? I only want to skip if > > > AF_XDP doesn't exist in the test kernel. > > > > > > [1]: https://netdev-3.bots.linux.dev/vmksft-net-drv/results/987742/config > > > > I'll give it a few more hours incase anyone has comments before I > > resend, but I got something working (tested on kernels with and > > without XDP sockets). > > > > xdp_helper returns -1 if (errno == EAFNOSUPPORT). All other error > > cases return 1. > > > > Updated the python to do this: > > > > if xdp.returncode == 255: > > raise KsftSkipEx('AF_XDP unsupported') > > elif xdp.returncode > 0: > > raise KsftFailEx('unable to create AF_XDP socket') > > > > Which seems to work on both types of kernels? > > > > Happy to take feedback; will hold off on respinning for a bit just > > incase there's a better way I don't know about. > > Any reason not to enable CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS on NIPA kernels? Seems a bit > surprising that we run networking tests without XSKs enabled. I can't comment on NIPA because I have no idea how it works. Maybe there is a kernel with some options enabled and other kernels with various options disabled? I wonder if that's a separate issue though? In other words: maybe writing the test as I've mentioned above so it works regardless of whether CONFIG_XDP_SOCKETS is set or not is a good idea just on its own? I'm just not sure if there's some other pattern I should be following other than what I proposed above. I'm hesitant to re-spin until I get feedback on the proposed approach.
