On 24/04/2025 at 23:02, Felix Maurer wrote:
On 24.04.25 09:42, Vincent Mailhol wrote:
On Tue. 22 Apr. 2025 at 21:08, Felix Maurer fmaurer@redhat.com wrote:
[...]
+ALL_TESTS="
test_raw_filter+"
+net_dir=$(dirname $0)/.. +source $net_dir/lib.sh
+VCANIF="vcan0"
Here, you are making the VCANIF variable configuration, but then, in your test_raw_filter.c I see:
#define VCANIF "vcan0"
This means that in order to modify the interface, one would have to both modify the .sh script and the .c source. Wouldn't it be possible to centralize this? For example by reading the environment variable in the C file?
Or maybe there is a smarter way to pass values in the kernel selftests framework which I am not aware of?
Good point, I'll try to come up with something to avoid the duplication (either from the selftest framework or just for the CAN tests). I'd prefer an argument to the program though, as I find this the more usual way to pass info if one ever wants to run the test directly.
Passing an argument would be the best. I am not sure how to do this with the selftests (but I did not investigate either).
+setup() +{
ip link add name $VCANIF type vcan || exit $ksft_skipip link set dev $VCANIF uppwd+}
Speaking of which, if you allow the user to modify the interface, then you will one additional check here to see whether it is a virtual can interface or not (the ip link commands are not the same for the vcan and the physical can).
Something like:
CANIF="${CANIF:-vcan}" BITRATE="${BITRATE:-500000}"
setup() { if [ $CANIF == vcan* ]; then ip link add name $CANIF type vcan || exit $ksft_skip else ip link set dev $CANIF type can $BITRATE 500000 fi ip link set dev $VCANIF up pwd }
+cleanup() +{
ip link delete $VCANIF+}
I guess that this setup() and this cleanup() is something that you will also need in the other can tests. Would it make sense to declare these in a common.sh file and just do a
source common.sh
here?
I usually try to avoid making changes in anticipation of the future. I'm not sure if all the tests need a similar environment and would prefer to split this when we encounter that they do. Are you okay with that?
Yes, this works. Keep this idea in back of your mind and if there is a need to reuse those in the future, then it will be a good timing to do the factorize the code.
Yours sincerely, Vincent Mailhol