Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 20 Mar 2023 10:44:50 +0200 | From | Ido Schimmel <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 6/6] selftests: forwarding: add dynamic FDB test |
| |
On Sat, Mar 18, 2023 at 03:10:10PM +0100, Hans J. Schultz wrote: > +# Test of dynamic FDB entries. > +locked_port_dyn_fdb() > +{ > + local mac=00:01:02:03:04:05 > + local ageing_time > + > + RET=0 > + ageing_time=$(bridge_ageing_time_get br0) > + tc qdisc add dev $swp2 clsact > + ip link set dev br0 type bridge ageing_time $LOW_AGEING_TIME > + bridge link set dev $swp1 learning on locked on > + > + bridge fdb replace $mac dev $swp1 master dynamic > + 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 $swp1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ > + -a $mac -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q
Packets should be injected via $h1, not $swp1. See other test cases in this file.
> + tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 1 > + check_err $? "Packet not seen on egress after adding dynamic FDB"
Does this actually work? The packet is transmitted via $swp1, I don't understand how it can arrive at the egress of $swp2.
> + > + sleep $((LOW_AGEING_TIME / 100 + 10)) > + > + $MZ $swp1 -c 1 -p 128 -t udp "sp=54321,dp=12345" \ > + -a $mac -b `mac_get $h2` -A 192.0.2.1 -B 192.0.2.2 -q > + tc_check_packets "dev $swp2 egress" 1 1 > + check_fail $? "Dynamic FDB entry did not age out"
Shouldn't this be check_err()? After the FDB entry was aged you want to make sure that packets received via $swp1 with SMAC being $mac are no longer forwarded by the bridge.
Also, I suggest executing 'bridge fdb get' to make sure the entry is no longer present in the bridge FDB.
> + > + ip link set dev br0 type bridge ageing_time $ageing_time > + bridge link set dev $swp1 learning off locked off > + tc qdisc del dev $swp2 clsact > + > + log_test "Locked port dyn FDB" > +} > + > trap cleanup EXIT > > setup_prepare > -- > 2.34.1 >
| |