Re: [PATCH] tc-testing: flush gact actions on test teardown

[Shuah Khan]

On 05/22/2018 09:49 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Shuah Khan <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Tue, 22 May 2018 09:43:28 -0600
> 
>> On 05/18/2018 10:21 AM, Vlad Buslov wrote:
>>> Test 6fb4 creates one mirred and one pipe action, but only flushes mirred
>>> on teardown. Leaking pipe action causes failures in other tests.
>>>
>>> Add additional teardown command to also flush gact actions.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Vlad Buslov <vladbu@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>>  tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/mirred.json | 3 ++-
>>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/mirred.json b/tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/mirred.json
>>> index 443c9b3..acb24f7 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/mirred.json
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/tc-testing/tc-tests/actions/mirred.json
>>> @@ -44,7 +44,8 @@
>>>          "matchPattern": "action order [0-9]*: mirred \\(Egress Redirect to device lo\\).*index 2 ref",
>>>          "matchCount": "1",
>>>          "teardown": [
>>> -            "$TC actions flush action mirred"
>>> +            "$TC actions flush action mirred",
>>> +            "$TC actions flush action gact"
>>>          ]
>>>      },
>>>      {
>>>
>>
>> I can get this into 4.18-rc1 unless there is a reason for this to go
>> through net tree.
> 
> Why wouldn't a networking testing bug fix go through my tree?
> 

I usually take the selftest patches unless there is dependency on another
tree. I am fine with it going through net tree

Acked-by: Shuah Khan (Samsung OSG) <shuah@xxxxxxxxxx>

thanks,
-- Shuah