On Fri, 27 Feb 2026 09:34:28 +0200 Ioana Ciornei wrote: > On Thu, Feb 26, 2026 at 06:25:11PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Thu, 26 Feb 2026 16:18:21 +0200 Ioana Ciornei wrote: > > > > How about, fail the test if any are greater than 1% of the number of > > > > packets transmitted/received? My _guess_ is, if you have 1% packet > > > > loss, networking is not going to be happy anyway. It probably means > > > > you have one end doing Half duplex and the other Full. That is a > > > > typical configuration error you see causing collisions. Not that i've > > > > actually seen this for maybe a decade! > > > > > > > > Failing the test, with a comment about checking duplex configuration, > > > > seems sensible. > > > > > > Seems reasonable. Thanks for the help! > > > > FWIW the expectation is that the test should be able to run even on > > systems / boards with a single interface. So the control traffic > > (communicating with the traffic generator) will run over the same > > interface as the test. 1% error is unachievable. I'd only check the > > lower bound, and use some sanity value for the upper bound (2^30 ?) > > if at all > > Really? I didn't know of that expectation at all. > > I did take ethtool_rmon.sh as an example and that selftest as well > takes NUM_NETIFS=2 and does check for both a lower bound and upper bound > that takes into account a 1% deviance from the target.
I called out in the other thread that the bash scripts in this dir pre-date any serious CI use. They are only there to get them out of the way of SW-only CI testing. > How would the test even work with only a single interface? Hopefully the readme mentioned in my other reply clarifies.
