Linux Ethernet Bridging - Sep 2022 - [Bridge] [PATCH v6 net-next 0/9] Extend locked port feature with FDB locked flag (MAC-Auth/MAB)

On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 07:42:37AM +0200, netdev at kapio-technology.com
wrote:
> Obviously my method of selecting all switchcore drivers with sub-options
> under menuconfig was not sufficient, and I didn't know of the
allmodconfig
> option, otherwise I would have used it.
You can see build issues on patchwork:

https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220928150256.115248-6-netdev
at kapio-technology.com/

Also:

https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#what-level-of-testing-is-expected-before-i-submit-my-change

https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#can-i-reproduce-the-checks-from-patchwork-on-my-local-machine

https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#running-all-the-builds-and-checks-locally-is-a-pain-can-i-post-my-patches-and-have-the-patchwork-bot-validate-them
> So the question is if I should repost the fixed patch-set or I need to make
> a new version?
A new fixed version (v7) is required, but wait for this version to be
reviewed first.
> Anyhow I hope that there will not be problems when running the selftests,
as
> I have not been able to do so with my system, so there can be more that
> needs to be changed.
It's not really acceptable to post tests that you haven't run... What
exactly is the issue? You should be able to run the tests with veth
pairs in a VM.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2022 17:05:20 +0300 Ido Schimmel wrote:
> You can see build issues on patchwork:
Overall a helpful response, but that part you got wrong.

Do not point people to patchwork checks, please. It will only encourage
people to post stuff they haven't build tested themselves.

It's documented:

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-netdev.html#running-all-the-builds-and-checks-locally-is-a-pain-can-i-post-my-patches-and-have-the-patchwork-bot-validate-them

Only people who helped write the code and maintain the infra can decide
how to use it which means me, Kees, or Hangbin. Please and thank you :S

On 2022-09-30 16:05, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2022 at 07:42:37AM +0200, netdev at kapio-technology.com 
> wrote:
>> Obviously my method of selecting all switchcore drivers with 
>> sub-options
>> under menuconfig was not sufficient, and I didn't know of the 
>> allmodconfig
>> option, otherwise I would have used it.
> 
> You can see build issues on patchwork:
> 
>
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20220928150256.115248-6-netdev
at kapio-technology.com/
> 
> Also:
> 
>
https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#what-level-of-testing-is-expected-before-i-submit-my-change
> 
>
https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#can-i-reproduce-the-checks-from-patchwork-on-my-local-machine
> 
>
https://docs.kernel.org/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#running-all-the-builds-and-checks-locally-is-a-pain-can-i-post-my-patches-and-have-the-patchwork-bot-validate-them
> 
>> So the question is if I should repost the fixed patch-set or I need to 
>> make
>> a new version?
> 
> A new fixed version (v7) is required, but wait for this version to be
> reviewed first.
> 
>> Anyhow I hope that there will not be problems when running the 
>> selftests, as
>> I have not been able to do so with my system, so there can be more 
>> that
>> needs to be changed.
> 
> It's not really acceptable to post tests that you haven't run...
What
> exactly is the issue? You should be able to run the tests with veth
> pairs in a VM.
It is only the blackhole test that I have not been able to run as is, 
but I have stepped it manually as far as I could.
My environment has changed lately and in that context the building of 
the selftests fails and I don't know why,I just get some error 
messagesabout missing header files, and setting up a whole system like 
f.ex. linuxfromscratch with the necessary libs and tools to run it in a 
VM is too time consuming a task at the moment.

If there is some freely available system for the purpose out there 
besides my own system based on Buildroot that does not work now, please 
let me know...

On 2022-09-30 16:05, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> What exactly is the issue? You should be able to run the tests with 
> veth
> pairs in a VM.
First there is an issue with alsa missing for some mixer tests, then 
there is several reports of sys/capability.h missing, and then just 
really many obscure problems that look like wrong lib versions are in 
place. Here is some of the long log of errors etc... :(


In file included from lib/elf.c:8:
include/test_util.h: In function ?align_up?:
include/test_util.h:134:7: warning: format ?%lu? expects argument of 
type ?long unsigned int?, but argument 6 has type ?uint64_t? {aka ?long 
long unsigned int?} [-Wformat=]
   134 |       "size not a power of 2: %lu", size);
       |       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  ~~~~
       |                                     |
       |                                     uint64_t {aka long long 
unsigned int}
include/test_util.h:54:43: note: in definition of macro ?TEST_ASSERT?
    54 |  test_assert((e), #e, __FILE__, __LINE__, fmt, ##__VA_ARGS__)
       |                                           ^~~
include/test_util.h:134:33: note: format string is defined here
   134 |       "size not a power of 2: %lu", size);
       |                               ~~^
       |                                 |
       |                                 long unsigned int
       |                               %llu
include/test_util.h: In function ?align_ptr_up?:
include/test_util.h:150:9: warning: cast to pointer from integer of 
different size [-Wint-to-pointer-cast]
   150 |  return (void *)align_up((unsigned long)x, size);
       |         ^
In file included from include/kvm_util.h:10,
                  from lib/elf.c:13:
include/kvm_util_base.h: At top level:
include/kvm_util_base.h:93:26: error: field ?stats_header? has 
incomplete type
    93 |  struct kvm_stats_header stats_header;
       |                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~
In file included from ../../../include/linux/kernel.h:8,
                  from ../../../include/linux/list.h:7,
                  from ../../../include/linux/hashtable.h:10,
                  from include/kvm_util_base.h:13,
                  from include/kvm_util.h:10,
                  from lib/elf.c:13:
include/kvm_util_base.h: In function ?kvm_vm_reset_dirty_ring?:
include/kvm_util_base.h:308:24: error: ?KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS? 
undeclared (first use in this function); did you mean 
?KVM_GET_DIRTY_LOG??
   308 |  return __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS, NULL);
       |                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../../include/linux/build_bug.h:79:56: note: in definition of macro 
?__static_assert?
    79 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, 
msg)
       |                                                        ^~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:193:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?static_assert?
   193 |  static_assert(!_IOC_SIZE(cmd) || sizeof(*arg) == 
_IOC_SIZE(cmd), ""); \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:216:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?kvm_do_ioctl?
   216 |  kvm_do_ioctl((vm)->fd, cmd, arg);   \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:308:9: note: in expansion of macro ?__vm_ioctl?
   308 |  return __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS, NULL);
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:308:24: note: each undeclared identifier is 
reported only once for each function it appears in
   308 |  return __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS, NULL);
       |                        ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../../include/linux/build_bug.h:79:56: note: in definition of macro 
?__static_assert?
    79 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, 
msg)
       |                                                        ^~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:193:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?static_assert?
   193 |  static_assert(!_IOC_SIZE(cmd) || sizeof(*arg) == 
_IOC_SIZE(cmd), ""); \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:216:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?kvm_do_ioctl?
   216 |  kvm_do_ioctl((vm)->fd, cmd, arg);   \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:308:9: note: in expansion of macro ?__vm_ioctl?
   308 |  return __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS, NULL);
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:193:16: error: expression in static assertion is 
not an integer
   193 |  static_assert(!_IOC_SIZE(cmd) || sizeof(*arg) == 
_IOC_SIZE(cmd), ""); \
       |                ^
../../../include/linux/build_bug.h:79:56: note: in definition of macro 
?__static_assert?
    79 | #define __static_assert(expr, msg, ...) _Static_assert(expr, 
msg)
       |                                                        ^~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:193:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?static_assert?
   193 |  static_assert(!_IOC_SIZE(cmd) || sizeof(*arg) == 
_IOC_SIZE(cmd), ""); \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:216:2: note: in expansion of macro 
?kvm_do_ioctl?
   216 |  kvm_do_ioctl((vm)->fd, cmd, arg);   \
       |  ^~~~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h:308:9: note: in expansion of macro ?__vm_ioctl?
   308 |  return __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_RESET_DIRTY_RINGS, NULL);
       |         ^~~~~~~~~~
include/kvm_util_base.h: In function ?vm_get_stats_fd?:
include/kvm_util_base.h:313:26: error: ?KVM_GET_STATS_FD? undeclared 
(first use in this function); did you mean ?KVM_GET_SREGS??
   313 |  int fd = __vm_ioctl(vm, KVM_GET_STATS_FD, NULL);
       |                          ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~