Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: Add a missing config option

On 7/30/26 5:46 PM, Alice Mikityanska wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 30, 2026, at 10:46, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>> AFAICS the target packet number is independent from KSFT_MACHINE_SLOW
>> and the actual offload setting. Possibly you can tune the target value a
>> bit WRT the mentioned variables or skip entirely pkts number validation
>> in the slowest permutation (note that the self-test will still have some
>> value due to code coverage with sanitizers enabled).
> 
> Hmm, the above makes sense for the failures like this:
> 
> https://netdev-ctrl.bots.linux.dev/logview.html?f=/logs/vmksft/net-dbg/results/754376/28-big-tcp-tunnels-sh/stdout
> 
> 971 is slightly below than 1000 (even though it's typically 1600-1700 on
> the CI runners, in this configuration). Tuning the thresholds can help.
> 
> But I also see failures like this:
> 
> https://netdev-ctrl.bots.linux.dev/logview.html?f=/logs/vmksft/net-dbg/results/751124/21-big-tcp-tunnels-sh/stdout
> 
> It's a complete zero, so lowering the threshold won't help here. I could
> reproduce it on my machine, although it requires hours of retries. I'd
> like to capture the tcpdump and see what actually happens in this case.
Ah, sorry, I haven't seen such failure yet. I *think* that one deserves
a better investigation. Are you able to reproduce locally that kind of
failure? If the such event frequency is low, perhaps it makes sense to
improve the stability incrementally?

/P