On 9/20/21 12:35, Amber, Kumar wrote: > Hi all, > > The following commit ID with the following description added a test case for > "tunnel-push-pop" test-suit by the name: "tunnel_push_pop - packet_out > debug_slow" has been found to be failing on the latest master branch. > > ## ------------------------------- ## > ## openvswitch 2.16.90 test suite. ## > ## ------------------------------- ## > 779: tunnel_push_pop - packet_out debug_slow FAILED > (ovs-macros.at:242) > > ## ------------- ## > ## Test results. ## > ## ------------- ## > > ERROR: 1 test was run, > 1 failed unexpectedly. > > We did some investigation, and the matching is the cause of the failure. > > ./ovs-macros.at:242: hard failure > > 779. tunnel-push-pop.at:598: 779. tunnel_push_pop - packet_out debug_slow > (tunnel-push-pop.at:598): FAILED (ovs-macros.at:242) > > Commit patch: 7e6b41ac8d9d183655be96795b529adeb33aeb47 > > dpif-netdev: Fix crash when PACKET_OUT is metered. > > When a PACKET_OUT has output port of OFPP_TABLE, and the rule > table includes a meter and this causes the packet to be deleted, > execute with a clone of the packet, restoring the original packet > if it is changed by the execution. > > Add tests to verify the original issue is fixed, and that the fix > doesn't break tunnel processing. > > Would the authors of the patch investigate why the test is failing? > > Regards > Amber
Hi. I can't reproduce the issue. I re-run the test 10 times on 2 of my systems and it works 10/10 without any issues. And none of our CI systems has issues with this test. The patch that added the test should not affect packet matching as it only changes the execution of actions, just to avoid the crash under certain conditions, and it tries to do that with least amount of side effects possible. So, this patch should not be a root cause. Maybe the new test case just uncovered a different issue in packet matching? The test itself was carefully crafted to catch a particular issue where packet is not encapsulated, while it should be. And the test itself seems solid. Does it still fail for you, if you revert code changes from the patch but keep the aforementioned unit test (this test is not for the crash itself, so it should pass without the change in the patch)? Anyway, what does "the matching is the cause of the failure" mean? Are you testing with avx512 enabled? If so, doesn't autovalidator tell you what the issue is? Best regards, Ilya Maximets. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
