Re: [PATCH net-next v2] selftests: drv-net: replace the nsim ring test with a drv-net one

• def test_config(config):

•    try:
  

•        cfg.eth.channels_set(ehdr | config)
  

•        get = cfg.eth.channels_get(ehdr)
  

•        for k, v in config.items():
  

•            ksft_eq(get.get(k, 0), v)
  

•    except NlError as e:
  

•        failed.append(mix)
  

•        ksft_pr("Can't set", config, e)
  

•    else:
  

•        ksft_pr("Okay", config)
  

We expect failure to leave the configuration unchanged. So i would actually do:

try: before = get() set() except: after = get() fail(after != before)

Also, does nlError contain the error code?

fail(e.errcode not in (EINVAL, EOPNOTSUPP))

It would be good to detect and fail ENOTSUPP, which does appear every so often, when it should not.

• # Try to reach min on all settings
• for param in params:

•    val = rings[param]
  

•    while True:
  

•        try:
  

•            cfg.eth.rings_set({'header':{'dev-index': cfg.ifindex},
  

•                               param: val // 2})
  

•            val //= 2
  

•            if val <= 1:
  

•                break
  

•        except NlError:
  

•            break
  

Is 0 ever valid? I would actually test 0 and make sure it fails with EINVAL, or EOPNOTSUPP. Getting range checks wrong is a typical bug, so it is good to test them. The happy days cases are boring because developers tend to test those, so they are hardly worth testings. Its the edge cases which should be tested.

Andrew