[PATCH] test/mbuf: fix the forked process segment fault

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Mon, 22 May 2023 11:19:24 +0100
"Burakov, Anatoly" <anatoly.burakov at intel.com> wrote:

> > 
> > This case validates mbuf. IMO there is no need to do validation in a secondary process.
> > Unit test for rte_panic() also uses fork() and could have the same issue.
> >   
> 
> In that case, rte_panic() test should be fixed as well.
> 
> My concern is that ideally, we shouldn't intentionally crash the test 
> app if something goes wrong, and calling rte_panic() accomplishes just 
> that - which is why I suggested running them in secondary processes 
> instead, so that any call into rte_panic happens inside a secondary 
> process, and the main test process doesn't crash even if the test has 
> failed.
> 

All forks outside of EAL are bad. The test should be removed, it was buggy
when first written.