> + 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
