On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 06:25:11PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 16:18:21 +0200 Ioana Ciornei wrote:
> > > How about, fail the test if any are greater than 1% of the number of
> > > packets transmitted/received? My _guess_ is, if you have 1% packet
> > > loss, networking is not going to be happy anyway. It probably means
> > > you have one end doing Half duplex and the other Full. That is a
> > > typical configuration error you see causing collisions. Not that i've
> > > actually seen this for maybe a decade!
> > > 
> > > Failing the test, with a comment about checking duplex configuration,
> > > seems sensible.  
> > 
> > Seems reasonable. Thanks for the help!
> 
> FWIW the expectation is that the test should be able to run even on
> systems / boards with a single interface. So the control traffic
> (communicating with the traffic generator) will run over the same
> interface as the test. 1% error is unachievable. I'd only check the
> lower bound, and use some sanity value for the upper bound (2^30 ?)
> if at all

Really? I didn't know of that expectation at all.

I did take ethtool_rmon.sh as an example and that selftest as well
takes NUM_NETIFS=2 and does check for both a lower bound and upper bound
that takes into account a 1% deviance from the target.

How would the test even work with only a single interface?

Reply via email to