On Fri, Nov 17, 2023 at 12:00:24AM +0100, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 15, 2023 at 01:36:40PM +0100, Thomas Haller wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2023-11-15 at 13:30 +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> > [...]
> > > > I see _lots_ of DUMP FAIL with kernel 5.4
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Could you provide more details?
> > >
> > > For example,
> > >
> > > make -j && ./tests/shell/run-tests.sh tests/shell/testcases/include/0007glob_double_0 -x
> > > grep ^ -a -R /tmp/nft-test.latest.*/
> >
> > # cat [...]/ruleset-diff.json
> > --- testcases/include/dumps/0007glob_double_0.json-nft 2023-11-15 13:27:20.272084254 +0100
> > +++ /tmp/nft-test.20231116-170617.584.lrZzMy/test-testcases-include-0007glob_double_0.1/ruleset-after.json 2023-11-16 17:06:18.332535411 +0100
> > @@ -1 +1 @@
> > -{"nftables": [{"metainfo": {"version": "VERSION", "release_name": "RELEASE_NAME", "json_schema_version": 1}}, {"table": {"family": "ip", "name": "x", "handle": 1}}, {"table": {"family": "ip", "name": "y", "handle": 2}}]}
> > +{"nftables": [{"metainfo": {"version": "VERSION", "release_name": "RELEASE_NAME", "json_schema_version": 1}}, {"table": {"family": "ip", "name": "x", "handle": 158}}, {"table": {"family": "ip", "name": "y", "handle": 159}}]}
> >
> > It seems that handles are a problem in this diff.
>
> Are you running tests with -s option?
This is plain run with no options.
> In that case, modules are removed after each test.
>
> I suspect its because we can then hit -EAGAIN mid-transaction
> because module is missing (again), then replay logic does its
> thing.
>
> But the handle generator isn't transaction aware,
> so it has advanced vs. the aborted partial transaction.
>
> I'm not sure what to do here.
>
> One the one hand those rmmods are plain stupid, but on the other
> hand this adds partial coverage for the rmmod path.
>
> We could make the handle counter transaction aware to
> "fix" this on kernel side; it should not be too much code.
>
> What do you think?
I don't think this needs a kernel fix.
The kernel is free to allocate handle, the guarantee is that they are
unique. How this handles are allocated could change in the future.
There is no way userspace can forecast how handles are allocated.
Phil made some code to skip comparing handles in tests/py that I
remember to deal with this.
