On Fri, Oct 17, 2025 at 11:27:26AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 12:45 AM Bastien Curutchet (eBPF Foundation) > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi all, > > > > Now that the merge window is over, here's a respin of the previous > > iteration rebased on the latest bpf-next_base. The bug triggering the > > XDP_ADJUST_TAIL_SHRINK_MULTI_BUFF failure when CONFIG_DEBUG_VM is > > enabled hasn't been fixed yet so I've moved the test to the flaky > > table. > > > > The test_xsk.sh script covers many AF_XDP use cases. The tests it runs > > are defined in xksxceiver.c. Since this script is used to test real > > hardware, the goal here is to leave it as it is, and only integrate the > > tests that run on veth peers into the test_progs framework. > > > > Some tests are flaky so they can't be integrated in the CI as they are. > > I think that fixing their flakyness would require a significant amount of > > work. So, as first step, I've excluded them from the list of tests > > migrated to the CI (cf PATCH 14). If these tests get fixed at some > > point, integrating them into the CI will be straightforward. > > > > PATCH 1 extracts test_xsk[.c/.h] from xskxceiver[.c/.h] to make the > > tests available to test_progs. > > PATCH 2 to 7 fix small issues in the current test > > PATCH 8 to 13 handle all errors to release resources instead of calling > > exit() when any error occurs. > > PATCH 14 isolates some flaky tests > > PATCH 15 integrate the non-flaky tests to the test_progs framework > > Looks good, but why does it take so long to run? > > time ./test_progs -t xsk > Summary: 2/66 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > real 0m29.031s > user 0m4.414s > sys 0m20.893s > > That's a big addition to overall test_progs time. > Could you reduce it to a couple seconds?
it's because veth pair is setup per each test case from what i recall when i was pointing this out during review. it does not scale. it would be better to have veth created once for whole test suite. HTH.
