Re: [libvirt] [tck PATCH 5/4] nwfilter: account for more leading 0's in MAC addresses in ebtables output

On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 02:56:31PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 09:51:09AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: >> On 2/11/19 6:11 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 06:07:40AM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: >>>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2019, 5:50 AM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com&gt; >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 02:03:05PM -0500, Laine Stump wrote: >>>>>> Since this test (050-apply-verify-host.t), we can't use a regexp in >>>>>> the string to be compared. The fix method that leads to the least >>>>>> changes is to use sed to remove potential leading 0's. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Laine Stump <laine(a)laine.org&gt; >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> (These changes fix *almost* all failures in >>>>>> nwfilter/050-apply-verify-host.t on RHEL8. The rest look like they >>>>>> might be legitimate problems with ebtables and IPv6) >>>>> Interesting, I swear I have previously got that test to succeed so >>>>> wonder what's changed since then ! >>>>> >>>> I figured it out yesterday evening but haven't gotten a chance to post it >>>> yet. I was being alarmist - its not a behavioral difference, but just a >>>> difference in how ipv6 addresses are formatted. The original ebtables >>>> reports ipv6 addresses with a netmask (/ffff:ffff:ffff:ffff:8000::) while >>>> the iptables-ebtables package that RHRL8 is now using reports it with a >>>> prefix (/65). They probably hadn't switched packages yet the last time you >>>> ran the test. I have a patch that modifies the expected output (and uses >>>> sed to modify the output from 'older' hosts, similar to what you had done >>>> for RARP vs 0x8035) and will post it in a few hours, once I've had coffee >>>> and tested on both types of host. >>> IMHO that should be reported as a bug against ebtables. The output format >>> of the new tools should be 100% identical tothe old tools. Changing from >>> a netmask to a prefix is a significant semantic difference that will break >>> too many uses. >> >> I thought about that, but wasn't feeling that ambitious since it was Sunday. >> If this is considered a bug, then changing the MAC address format from >> %x:%x:%x:%x:%x:%x to %0x:%0x:%0x:%0x:%0x:%0x should also be considered a >> bug. > Yes, I thought about that too. I think it would be worth raising that with > the maintainers to validate this was intentional. I get the feeling they'll > say that the old behaviour was a clear bug. If anything I'd probably ask > them to fix the old impl to not skip leading zeros too. IMHO mac addrs > should always be exactly the same length when printed. > >> I'll still post a patch to remedy it in the tests, but won't push it (unless >> you think that's worthwhile) and will file a bug instead. > Yep, lets at least wait & see what response we get to a bug report on this > issue. Upstream has now taken a patch which changes the old ip6tables tool to print the prefix, instead of netmask too, so we need to take this patch of yours to the TCK