> On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 3:56 AM Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Check properly the connection tracking entry status configured running
> > bpf_ct_change_status kfunc.
> > Remove unnecessary IPS_CONFIRMED status configuration since it is
> > already done during entry allocation.
> >
> > Fixes: 6eb7fba007a7 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for new nf_conntrack kfuncs")
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c | 4 ++--
> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 8 +++++---
> > 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > index 544bf90ac2a7..903d16e3abed 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
> > /* allow some tolerance for test_delta_timeout value to avoid races. */
> > ASSERT_GT(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 8, "Test for min ct timeout update");
> > ASSERT_LE(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 10, "Test for max ct timeout update");
> > - /* expected status is IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> > - ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 2, "Test for ct status update ");
> > + /* expected status is IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> > + ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 0xa, "Test for ct status update ");
>
> Why do we use 0xa instead of IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY?
> To avoid dependency on the header file?
nope, thx for reporting it. I will fix it in v2.
Regards,
Lorenzo
>
> Thanks,
> Song
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
