Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5 11/17] selftests/bpf: Verify xdp_metadata xdp->af_xdp path

From: Martin KaFai Lau <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2023 18:05:25 -0800

On 12/22/22 8:06 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
>>> +     /* First half of umem is for TX. This way address matches 1-to-1
>>> +      * to the completion queue index.
>>> +      */
>>> +
>>> +     for (i = 0; i < UMEM_NUM / 2; i++) {
>>> +             addr = i * UMEM_FRAME_SIZE;
>>> +             printf("%p: tx_desc[%d] -> %lx\n", xsk, i, addr);
>> Do you still need this verbose printf which is in a loop?  Also, how about other
>> printf in this test?
> In case we'd ever need to debug this test, those printfs shouldn't
> hurt, right? Or are you concerned about this test polluting the output
> with something like 'test_progs -v -v' ?
> 

Asking just in case it was some left over from the earlier rfc that is no longer 
needed. I think only failure test get logged in CI, so I don't mind to leave 
them here if they will be useful to debug other earlier/later ASSERTs.