Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 21 Sep 2022 10:15:18 +0300 | From | Ido Schimmel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 net-next 6/6] selftests: forwarding: add test of MAC-Auth Bypass to locked port tests |
| |
On Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 11:29:12PM +0200, netdev@kapio-technology.com wrote: > I have made a blackhole selftest, which looks like this: > > test_blackhole_fdb() > { > RET=0 > > check_blackhole_fdb_support || return 0 > > tcpdump_start $h2 > $MZ $h1 -q -t udp -a $h1 -b $h2
I don't think you can give an interface name to '-a' and '-b'?
> tcpdump_stop > tcpdump_show | grep -q udp > check_err $? "test_blackhole_fdb: No packet seen on initial" > tcpdump_cleanup > > bridge fdb add `mac_get $h2` dev br0 blackhole > bridge fdb show dev br0 | grep -q "blackhole"
Make this grep more specific so that we are sure it is the entry user space installed. Something like this:
bridge fdb get `mac_get $h2` br br0 | grep -q blackhole
> check_err $? "test_blackhole_fdb: No blackhole FDB entry found" > > tcpdump_start $h2 > $MZ $h1 -q -t udp -a $h1 -b $h2 > tcpdump_stop > tcpdump_show | grep -q udp > check_fail $? "test_blackhole_fdb: packet seen with blackhole fdb > entry" > tcpdump_cleanup
The tcpdump filter is not specific enough. It can catch other UDP packets (e.g., multicast) being received by $h2. Anyway, to be sure the feature works as expected we need to make sure that the packets are not even egressing $swp2. Checking that they are not received by $h2 is not enough. See this (untested) suggestion [1] that uses a tc filter on the egress of $swp2.
> > bridge fdb del `mac_get $h2` dev br0 blackhole > bridge fdb show dev br0 | grep -q "blackhole" > check_fail $? "test_blackhole_fdb: Blackhole FDB entry not deleted" > > tcpdump_start $h2 > $MZ $h1 -q -t udp -a $h1 -b $h2 > tcpdump_stop > tcpdump_show | grep -q udp > check_err $? "test_blackhole_fdb: No packet seen after removing > blackhole FDB entry" > tcpdump_cleanup > > log_test "Blackhole FDB entry test" > } > > the setup is simple and is the same as in bridge_sticky_fdb.sh. > > Does the test look sound or is there obvious mistakes?
[1] blackhole_fdb() { RET=0
tc filter add dev $swp2 egress protocol ip pref 1 handle 1 flower \ dst_ip 192.0.2.2 ip_proto udp dst_port 12345 action pass
$MZ $h1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ -a own -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q
tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 1 check_err $? "Packet not seen on egress before adding blackhole entry"
bridge fdb add `mac_get $h2` dev br0 blackhole bridge fdb get `mac_get $h2` br br0 | grep -q blackhole check_err $? "Blackhole entry not found"
$MZ $h1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ -a own -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q
tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 1 check_err $? "Packet seen on egress after adding blackhole entry"
# Check blackhole entries can be replaced. bridge fdb replace `mac_get $h2` dev $swp2 master static bridge fdb get `mac_get $h2` br br0 | grep -q blackhole check_fail $? "Blackhole entry found after replacement"
$MZ $h1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ -a own -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q
tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 2 check_err $? "Packet not seen on egress after replacing blackhole entry"
bridge fdb del `mac_get $h2` dev $swp2 master static tc filter del dev $swp2 egress protocol ip pref 1 handle 1 flower
log_test "Blackhole FDB entry" }
| |