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

From: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@nvidia.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.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 16:43:03 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ab156744-21fe-61dd-8471-8626c88e6218@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <48df5a60-f6e2-de05-1413-4511825511a5@nvidia.com>

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 Could be that it was outdated in s390x, but with [0] just merged in it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 Do you mean the image was outdated and didn't contain ethtool?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 ethtool was in the image, but was outdated?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?

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

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?

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