Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/6] selftests/bpf: Various sockmap-related fixes

[Michal Luczaj]

On 8/6/24 14:01, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 12:01 PM +02, Michal Luczaj wrote:
>> Series takes care of few bugs and missing features with the aim to improve
>> the test coverage of sockmap/sockhash.
>>
>> Last patch is a create_pair() rewrite making use of
>> __attribute__((cleanup)) to handle socket fd lifetime.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Luczaj <mhal@xxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> Changes in v2:
>> - Rebase on bpf-next (Jakub)
>> - Use cleanup helpers from kernel's cleanup.h (Jakub)
>> - Fix subject of patch 3, rephrase patch 4, use correct prefix
>> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240724-sockmap-selftest-fixes-v1-0-46165d224712@xxxxxxx
>>
>> Changes in v1:
>> - No declarations in function body (Jakub)
>> - Don't touch output arguments until function succeeds (Jakub)
>> - Link to v0: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/027fdb41-ee11-4be0-a493-22f28a1abd7c@xxxxxxx/
>>
>> ---
>> Michal Luczaj (6):
>>       selftests/bpf: Support more socket types in create_pair()
>>       selftests/bpf: Socket pair creation, cleanups
>>       selftests/bpf: Simplify inet_socketpair() and vsock_socketpair_connectible()
>>       selftests/bpf: Honour the sotype of af_unix redir tests
>>       selftests/bpf: Exercise SOCK_STREAM unix_inet_redir_to_connected()
>>       selftests/bpf: Introduce __attribute__((cleanup)) in create_pair()
>>
>>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_basic.c       |  28 ++--
>>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_helpers.h     | 149 ++++++++++++++-------
>>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_listen.c      | 117 ++--------------
>>  3 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 170 deletions(-)
>> ---
>> base-commit: 92cc2456e9775dc4333fb4aa430763ae4ac2f2d9
>> change-id: 20240729-selftest-sockmap-fixes-bcca996e143b
>>
>> Best regards,
> 
> Thanks again for these fixes. For the series:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Tested-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Great, thanks for the review. With this completed, I guess we can unwind
the (mail) stack to [1]. Is that ingress-to-local et al. something you
wanted to take care of yourself or can I give it a try?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/87msmqn9ws.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/

Also, I've noticed patchwork still lists (besides this one) the old version
of this series. Am I supposed to tell the bot to disregard it?