Re: [PATCH net-next 4/5] selftests: mptcp: convert iptables to nftables for mptcp_sockopt.sh

[Matthieu Baerts]

Hello,

On 28/09/2026 10:00, netdev-bot+sashiko@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential
> issue(s) to consider.
> 
> Critical: 0 · High: 0 · Medium: 1 · Low: 1
> 
> If you believe none of the issues are legitimate, please reply to each
> issue of Medium severity or higher and explain why the AI is wrong.

TL;DR: False positive: no new version needed here.

> If any of them are legitimate and you plan to respin, please let patchwork
> know by including "pw-bot: cr" as a separate line at the end of your reply
> (one such reply per series is enough).
> 
> - [Medium] The nft/jq tool check added to mptcp_lib_check_tools()
>   (tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_lib.sh:531-532) only runs…
> - [Low] In add_mark_rules()
>   (tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_sockopt.sh:57-60), the…
> 
> --
> 
> selftests: mptcp: convert iptables to nftables for mptcp_sockopt.sh
> 
> This commit makes mptcp_sockopt.sh use nftables instead of
> iptables/ip6tables. It creates ip/ip6 filter tables with an OUTPUT chain,
> and check_mark() now reads the drop counter through nft -j and jq. It also
> extends mptcp_lib_check_tools() to probe for nft and jq.
> 
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_lib.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_lib.sh
>> index b9d14647f4019..e65b4ebee06a6 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_lib.sh
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/mptcp/mptcp_lib.sh
>> @@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ mptcp_lib_check_tools() {
>>  				exit ${KSFT_SKIP}
>>  			fi
>>  			;;
>> -		"iptables"* | "ip6tables"*)
>> +		"iptables"* | "ip6tables"* | "nft" | "jq")
>>  			if ! "${tool}" -V &> /dev/null; then
> 
> [Severity: Medium]
> Is nft -V the right probe for nft here?
> 
> For nft, -V prints extended build information, and only newer nftables
> releases have it. The portable version flag is -v or --version, which is
> what the other selftests use. For example, the netfilter/*.sh scripts call
> nft --version.

It requires nft >= 0.9.4, released in 2020. I think we are good.

> If an older nft rejects -V, would mptcp_lib_check_tools() exit with
> KSFT_SKIP from the top-level call in mptcp_sockopt.sh?
> 
>     mptcp_lib_check_tools ip nft jq
> 
> That would also skip the transfer, sockopt and TCP_INQ subtests, which
> don't use nft at all.
> 
> The opposite case is also a concern. check_mark() needs an nft that was
> built with JSON support:
> 
>     drops=$(ip netns exec "$ns" nft -j list table "$tables" filter | \
>     ...
>     if [ -z "$drops" ] || [ "$drops" -ne 0 ]; then
>             mptcp_lib_pr_fail "got $tables $drops in ns $ns," \
>                               "not 0 - not all expected packets marked"
>             ret=${KSFT_FAIL}
> 
> On an nftables build without libjansson, nft -V still exits 0 and just
> reports json: no. add_mark_rules() works, because it only uses nft -f.
> 
> nft -j then fails with "JSON support not compiled-in", so drops is empty.
> The test then reports "not all expected packets marked" and sets
> KSFT_FAIL. Should a missing userspace feature give a skip here instead?
> 
> The later patch in the series, "selftests: mptcp: convert iptables to
> nftables for mptcp_join.sh", keeps the same "nft" | "jq" case with the -V
> probe. So it looks like this is still present at the end of the series.
> 
> Would a separate nft check match the real dependency better? For example,
> nft --version plus a JSON check such as nft -j list ruleset.

I don't expect packet distributions not building nft with JSON support.

Cheers,
Matt
-- 
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.