tcp-testsuite into src?

[tuexen at freebsd.org]

> On 23. Mar 2021, at 03:45, Alan Somers <asomers at freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Mar 22, 2021 at 7:31 PM Kevin Bowling <kevin.bowling at kev009.com> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I was talking with gnn and kevans on IRC about the tcp testsuite
> (https://github.com/freebsd-net/tcp-testsuite).
> 
> Currently we maintain this in ports, although the way the port is set
> up doesn't make a lot of sense because the tests are stack specific
> and we don't account for different FreeBSD versions let alone vendor
> trees.  It seems reasonable to me to pull the tests themselves (i.e.
> https://github.com/freebsd-net/tcp-testsuite) into src where they can
> follow along with the tree they are running on, and provide vendors a
> natural point of extension.
> 
> /usr/tests has some existing examples of relying on out of tree
> binaries to run so I am not convinced we need to import packetdrill
> itself but I don't have a strong preference.  tuexen, do you have any
> preference?
> 
> Regards,
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
> 
> Yeah, it's not a problem to use binaries from ports in /usr/tests.  As long as the tests can 
> compile they can live in the base system.  Is there a strong incentive to import them?  Do 
The tests are just scripts, which can be executed by packetdrill, which is available in the
ports tree.
> they need to be adjusted for each release? 
It depends. If things like default timeouts or so change, then the tests need to be adapted.
If we would have (and I guess we will) tests for loss recovery, then improvements to the
code might also require changes to the tests.

Best regards
Michael