FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12
Alexander V. Chernikov
melifaro at ipfw.ru
Wed Apr 15 20:21:32 UTC 2020
15.04.2020, 15:10, "Kristof Provost" <kp at freebsd.org>:
> On 15 Apr 2020, at 15:34, Kristof Provost wrote:
>> On 15 Apr 2020, at 0:37, Li-Wen Hsu wrote:
>>> (Please send the followup to freebsd-testing@ and note Reply-To is
>>> set.)
>>>
>>> FreeBSD CI Weekly Report 2020-04-12
>>> ===================================
>>>
>>> Here is a summary of the FreeBSD Continuous Integration results for
>>> the period
>>> from 2020-04-06 to 2020-04-12.
>>>
>>> During this period, we have:
>>>
>>> * 1801 builds (94.0% (+0.4) passed, 6.0% (-0.4) failed) of buildworld
>>> and
>>> buildkernel (GENERIC and LINT) were executed on aarch64, amd64,
>>> armv6,
>>> armv7, i386, mips, mips64, powerpc, powerpc64, powerpcspe, riscv64,
>>> sparc64 architectures for head, stable/12, stable/11 branches.
>>> * 288 test runs (25.1% (-24.6) passed, 29.9% (+10.6) unstable, 45.1%
>>> (+14.1)
>>> exception) were executed on amd64, i386, riscv64 architectures for
>>> head,
>>> stable/12, stable/11 branches.
>>> * 30 doc and www builds (83.3% (-1.3) passed, 16.7% (+1.3) failed)
>>>
>>> Test case status (on 2020-04-12 23:59):
>>> | Branch/Architecture | Total | Pass | Fail | Skipped
>>> |
>>> | ------------------- | --------- | ---------- | -------- | --------
>>> |
>>> | head/amd64 | 7744 (+4) | 7638 (+19) | 14 (+5) | 92 (-20)
>>> |
>>> | head/i386 | 7742 (+4) | 7628 (+15) | 16 (+5) | 98 (-16)
>>> |
>>> | 12-STABLE/amd64 | 7508 (0) | 7449 (-3) | 1 (+1) | 58 (+2)
>>> |
>>> | 12-STABLE/i386 | 7506 (0) | 7425 (-17) | 2 (+2) | 79 (+15)
>>> |
>>> | 11-STABLE/amd64 | 6882 (0) | 6829 (-6) | 1 (+1) | 52 (+5)
>>> |
>>> | 11-STABLE/i386 | 6880 (0) | 6749 (-82) | 80 (+80) | 51 (+2)
>>> |
>>>
>>> (The statistics from experimental jobs are omitted)
>>>
>>> If any of the issues found by CI are in your area of interest or
>>> expertise
>>> please investigate the PRs listed below.
>>>
>>> The latest web version of this report is available at
>>> https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/report-20200412 and archive is
>>> available at
>>> https://hackmd.io/@FreeBSD-CI/ , any help is welcome.
>>>
>>> ## News
>>>
>>> * The test env now loads the required module for firewall tests.
>>>
>>> * New armv7 job is added (to replace armv6 one):
>>> * FreeBSD-head-armv7-testvm
>>> The images are available at https://artifact.ci.freebsd.org
>>> FreeBSD-head-armv7-test is ready but needs test env update.
>>>
>>> ## Failing jobs
>>>
>>> * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-gcc6_build/
>>> * See console log for the error details.
>>>
>>> ## Failing tests
>>>
>>> * https://ci.freebsd.org/job/FreeBSD-head-amd64-test/
>>> * local.kyua.integration.cmd_about_test.topic__authors__installed
>>> * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v4
>>> * sys.netipsec.tunnel.empty.v6
>>> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipf_v4
>>> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.ipfw_v4
>>> * sys.netpfil.common.forward.pf_v4
>>> * sys.netpfil.common.tos.ipfw_tos
>>> * sys.netpfil.common.tos.pf_tos
>>> * sys.netpfil.pf.forward.v4
>> I can’t actually reproduce this failure in my test VM, but with the
>> ci test VM I can reproduce the problem.
>> It’s not related to pf, because the sanity check ping we do before
>> we set up pf already fails.
>> Or rather pft_ping.py sends an incorrect packet, because `ping` does
>> get the packet to go where it’s supposed to go.
>>
>> Scapy seems to fail to find the source IP address, so we get this:
>>
>> 12:12:22.152652 IP 0.0.0.0 > 198.51.100.3: ICMP echo request, id 0,
>> seq 0, length 12
>>
>> I have a vague recollection that we’ve seem this problem before, but
>> I can’t remember what we did about it.
>>
>> In all likelihood most of the other netpfil tests fail for exactly the
>> same reason.
>
> The problem appears to be that
> /usr/local/lib/python3.7/site-packages/scapy/arch/unix.py is misparsing
> the `netstat -rnW` output.
Thanks for the analysis!
Sorry for breaking the tests.
I should have run tests with userland changes installed.
I'll revert the netstat output changes shortly to unbreak the tests.
Re longer-term: parsing textual output for the routes does not seem to be a good habit, especially in these days.
Structural (libxo) approach looks better, however I guess this will make scapy unusable on the routers with full-view.
So far light-weight sysctl-route reader looks like the best option.
What do you folks think?
>
> For reference, this is the output in the test VM:
>
> Routing tables
>
> Internet:
> Destination Gateway Flags Nhop# Mtu Netif
> Expire
> 127.0.0.1 link#2 UH 1 16384 lo0
> 192.0.2.0/24 link#4 U 2 1500 epair0a
> 192.0.2.1 link#4 UHS 1 16384 lo0
> 198.51.100.0/24 192.0.2.2 UGS 3 1500 epair0a
>
> Internet6:
> Destination Gateway Flags
> Nhop# Mtu Netif Expire
> ::/96 ::1 UGRS
> 4 16384 lo0
> ::1 link#2 UH
> 1 16384 lo0
> ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS
> 4 16384 lo0
> fe80::/10 ::1 UGRS
> 4 16384 lo0
> fe80::%lo0/64 link#2 U
> 3 16384 lo0
> fe80::1%lo0 link#2 UHS
> 2 16384 lo0
> fe80::%epair0a/64 link#4 U
> 5 1500 epair0a
> fe80::3d:9dff:fe7c:d70a%epair0a link#4 UHS
> 1 16384 lo0
> fe80::%epair1a/64 link#6 U
> 6 1500 epair1a
> fe80::37:9eff:fe03:250a%epair1a link#6 UHS
> 1 16384 lo0
> ff02::/16 ::1 UGRS
> 4 16384 lo0
>
> The parsing code seems to think that the netif for the 198.51.100.0/24
> route is 1500 rather than epair0a.
> This may be related to the difference in netstat output, because on my
> VM it looks like this:
>
> Routing tables
>
> Internet:
> Destination Gateway Flags Use Mtu Netif
> Expire
> default 172.16.2.1 UGS 319 1500 vtnet0
> 127.0.0.1 link#2 UH 0 16384 lo0
> 172.16.2.0/24 link#1 U 14 1500 vtnet0
> 172.16.2.2 link#1 UHS 0 16384 lo0
>
> Internet6:
> Destination Gateway Flags
> Use Mtu Netif Expire
> ::/96 ::1 UGRS
> 0 16384 lo0
> ::1 link#2 UH
> 0 16384 lo0
> ::ffff:0.0.0.0/96 ::1 UGRS
> 0 16384 lo0
> fe80::/10 ::1 UGRS
> 0 16384 lo0
> fe80::%vtnet0/64 link#1 U
> 0 1500 vtnet0
> fe80::5a9c:fcff:fe02:a95e%vtnet0 link#1 UHS
> 0 16384 lo0
> fe80::%lo0/64 link#2 U
> 0 16384 lo0
> fe80::1%lo0 link#2 UHS
> 0 16384 lo0
> ff02::/16 ::1 UGRS
> 0 16384 lo0
>
> I suspect that this change was introduced in r359823 (Introduce nexthop
> objects and new routing KPI).
>
> Best regards,
> Kristof
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-current at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
More information about the freebsd-testing
mailing list