Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net: netconsole: selftests: Change the IP subnet

[Breno Leitao]

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 07:01:59PM +0200, Petr Machata wrote:
> 
> Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > Use a less populated IP range to run the tests, as suggested by Petr in
> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/87ikvukv3s.fsf@xxxxxxxxxx/.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Petr Machata <petrm@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Breno Leitao <leitao@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh
> > index 06021b2059b7..4ad1e216c6b0 100755
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/drivers/net/netcons_basic.sh
> > @@ -20,9 +20,9 @@ SCRIPTDIR=$(dirname "$(readlink -e "${BASH_SOURCE[0]}")")
> >  
> >  # Simple script to test dynamic targets in netconsole
> >  SRCIF="" # to be populated later
> > -SRCIP=192.168.1.1
> > +SRCIP=192.168.2.1
> 
> I mentioned 192.0.2.0/24, which we commonly use in selftests. The range
> is meant for examples and documentation, which is not exactly selftests,
> but feels like it's not bending the rules too far. And we shouldn't see
> the range in the wild.

True, my mistake. I will update it to 192.0.2.1 and 192.0.2.2.