From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga05.intel.com (mga05.intel.com [192.55.52.43]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F181D1860 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 21:05:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1656709509; x=1688245509; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=cPEPh/huc5+wJ4F4IEhSyidGnohtAvU4d1EsCfSHpWc=; b=YbQq5HKpBSuz3+getcqTm1Ix6sQLImlFXWyQPCbdwrTBWFLQX1+CVW02 Az4TqrIUtG8/8iqYNywJCUj36OT/q86OMyAr+Y+DISQ+DCyMUxsPnov3Z aDIMO7dEkTSGQlqIh0XfFv5bVZYQAURlTFFMNjJsFreEugtx6wlns91+k DO2yqP6LGb77yjJLjgTQM0Z8hj3FhtkNVO7DxR1V2dXTtIotaP1i4iMFJ sJ+SNLTrx4bx3wlE3/IL+iUpnbhwtqN9TUDt/OOPPSBxb5Fo/FigJC0dU XtCb7zonSyIoUeKOdsEzpUlAP9q6kIVz22PsI7cvqHXQugHpZYRuQN3uQ A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6400,9594,10395"; a="369064620" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,238,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="369064620" Received: from fmsmga003.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.29]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Jul 2022 14:05:09 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.92,238,1650956400"; d="scan'208";a="681539498" Received: from shubhaml-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com ([10.255.229.171]) by fmsmga003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 01 Jul 2022 14:05:09 -0700 Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:05:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mat Martineau To: Geliang Tang cc: mptcp@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: selftests/bpf: Add bpf_red test: Tests Results In-Reply-To: <617c2057-b8e5-90df-e246-4db5f439f678@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: <554ad2e8-2058-aa6d-5d7c-33dabeedf0c9@linux.intel.com> References: <22c84dbb74978d8062d453f6bc1857502078fc28.1656578856.git.geliang.tang@suse.com> <076e8532-b07a-fb64-d5d1-2294226cfc49@gmail.com> <20220630123409.GA9212@bogon> <617c2057-b8e5-90df-e246-4db5f439f678@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="0-1950991687-1656709509=:71463" This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --0-1950991687-1656709509=:71463 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Fri, 1 Jul 2022, Mat Martineau wrote: > On Thu, 30 Jun 2022, Geliang Tang wrote: > >> On Thu, Jun 30, 2022 at 10:32:37AM +0000, MPTCP CI wrote: >>> Hi Geliang, >>> >>> Thank you for your modifications, that's great! >>> >>> Our CI did some validations and here is its report: >>> >>> - KVM Validation: normal: >>> - Unstable: 1 failed test(s): selftest_simult_flows - Critical: 2 Call >>> Trace(s) ❌: >>> - Task: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5934869556494336 >>> - Summary: >>> https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/5934869556494336/summary/summary.txt >>> >>> - KVM Validation: debug: >>> - Unstable: 1 failed test(s): selftest_mptcp_join - Critical: 2 Call >>> Trace(s) ❌: >>> - Task: https://cirrus-ci.com/task/5371919603073024 >>> - Summary: >>> https://api.cirrus-ci.com/v1/artifact/task/5371919603073024/summary/summary.txt >>> >>> Initiator: Patchew Applier >>> Commits: >>> https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/commits/012eddf81089 >>> >>> >>> If there are some issues, you can reproduce them using the same >>> environment as >>> the one used by the CI thanks to a docker image, e.g.: >>> >>> $ cd [kernel source code] >>> $ docker run -v "${PWD}:${PWD}:rw" -w "${PWD}" --privileged --rm -it \ >>> --pull always mptcp/mptcp-upstream-virtme-docker:latest \ >>> auto-debug >>> >>> For more details: >>> >>> https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp-upstream-virtme-docker >>> >>> >>> Please note that despite all the efforts that have been already done to >>> have a >>> stable tests suite when executed on a public CI like here, it is possible >>> some >>> reported issues are not due to your modifications. Still, do not hesitate >>> to >>> help us improve that ;-) >>> >>> Cheers, >>> MPTCP GH Action bot >>> Bot operated by Matthieu Baerts (Tessares) >> >> Hi Matt, >> >> I can't reproduce all the CI failures. All tests (mptcp_connect.sh, >> mptcp_join.sh and bpf mptcp selftests) passed on my side. >> >> All the test logs are attached. > > I checked out the tag that the CI built from > (patchew/cover.1656578856.git.geliang.tang@suse.com), and it looks like the > CI hit this: > > if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!msk->recovery)) > > at line 999 of protocol.c, so this is an unexpected instance where dfrag == > msk->first_pending and msk->recovery is not set. My guess is that > msk->first_pending is not getting updated before returning from > __mptcp_push_pending() in some rare case. I'll look for this when reviewing > patch 2. I think this will probably be fixed by changing the dfrag updates as I describe in the patch 2 review comments. -- Mat Martineau Intel --0-1950991687-1656709509=:71463--