Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 0/5] New BPF helpers to accelerate synproxy

From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@nvidia.com>,
	Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, "Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Tariq Toukan" <tariqt@nvidia.com>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
	"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
	"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	"KP Singh" <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"Hideaki YOSHIFUJI" <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
	"David Ahern" <dsahern@kernel.org>,
	"Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
	"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <hawk@kernel.org>,
	"Nathan Chancellor" <nathan@kernel.org>,
	"Nick Desaulniers" <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
	"Joe Stringer" <joe@cilium.io>,
	"Florent Revest" <revest@chromium.org>,
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>,
	"Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" <memxor@gmail.com>,
	"Florian Westphal" <fw@strlen.de>,
	pabeni@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 0/5] New BPF helpers to accelerate synproxy
Date: Wed, 18 May 2022 21:42:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzbQ853vZyq1aYS8NQz_sAO0EVBUgOnHg8-ivS19nc1eFA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ab156744-21fe-61dd-8471-8626c88e6218@nvidia.com>

On Wed, May 18, 2022 at 6:43 AM Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@nvidia.com> wrote:
>
> On 2022-05-16 20:17, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
> > On 2022-05-11 14:48, Maxim Mikityanskiy wrote:
> >> On 2022-05-11 02:59, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 10, 2022 at 12:21 PM Maxim Mikityanskiy
> >>> <maximmi@nvidia.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2022-05-07 00:51, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Is it expected that your selftests will fail on s390x? Please check
> >>>>> [0]
> >>>>
> >>>> I see it fails with:
> >>>>
> >>>> test_synproxy:FAIL:ethtool -K tmp0 tx off unexpected error: 32512
> >>>> (errno 2)
> >>>>
> >>>> errno 2 is ENOENT, probably the ethtool binary is missing from the
> >>>> s390x
> >>>> image? When reviewing v6, you said you added ethtool to the CI image.
> >>>> Maybe it was added to x86_64 only? Could you add it to s390x?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Could be that it was outdated in s390x, but with [0] just merged in it
> >>> should have pretty recent one.
> >>
> >> Do you mean the image was outdated and didn't contain ethtool? Or
> >> ethtool was in the image, but was outdated? If the latter, I would
> >> expect it to work, this specific ethtool command has worked for ages.
> >
> > Hi Andrii,
> >
> > Could you reply this question? I need to understand whether I need to
> > make any changes to the CI before resubmitting.
>
> I brought up a s390x VM to run the test locally, and there are two
> issues with the latest (2022-05-09) s390x image:
>
> 1. It lacks stdbuf. stdbuf is used by
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/vmtest.sh to run any test, and this is
> clearly broken. Hence two questions:
>
> 1.1. How does CI work without stdbuf in the image? I thought it used the
> same vmtest.sh script, is that right?

no, CI doesn't use vmtest.sh. vmtest.sh is an approximation of what CI
is doing, but it doesn't share the code/scripts (it does use the same
kernel config and VM image, though)

>
> 1.2. Who can add stdbuf to the image (to fix local runs)?
>

For s390x things I usually ping Ilya. Ilya, can you help here please?

> 2. It lacks iptables needed by my test, so if I resubmit my series, it
> will fail on the CI again. Who can add iptables to the image?

Ditto, I'll defer to Ilya for this.

>
> I also compared the old (2021-03-24) and the new (2022-05-09) s390x
> images, and ethtool was indeed added only after my submission, so that
> explains the current CI error.
>
> > Thanks,
> > Max
>