New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
bpf: Fix name for example map #10768
bpf: Fix name for example map #10768
Conversation
test-focus RuntimeVerifier |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we do the same for LB4_REVERSE_NAT_SK_MAP
and LB6_REVERSE_NAT_SK_MAP
?
These map names were the same as the ones in Cilium, which is explicitly what we *don't* want, as that can cause local testing to interfere with real Cilium agent instances. This was picked up by running Cilium then running test/bpf/verifier-test.sh This was picked up by running Cilium then running test/bpf/verifier-test.sh, which fails due to the maps already existing on the filesystem. Signed-off-by: Joe Stringer <joe@cilium.io>
0f552b8
to
787e7f7
Compare
test-me-please |
1 similar comment
test-me-please |
Tests with kernel passed which shows the changes are good. Regular Ginkgo run seems to be flaking on known policy issue. |
These map names were the same as the ones in Cilium, which is explicitly
what we don't want, as that can cause local testing to interfere with
real Cilium agent instances. This was picked up by running Cilium then
running test/bpf/verifier-test.sh This was picked up by running Cilium
then running test/bpf/verifier-test.sh, which fails due to the maps
already existing on the filesystem.