linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/6] selftests/bpf: move open

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <67b3e76c57313_c6df029486@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2025 20:50:36 -0500
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Marcus Wichelmann <marcus.wichelmann@...zner-cloud.de>, 
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
 bpf@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Cc: willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com, 
 jasowang@...hat.com, 
 andrew+netdev@...n.ch, 
 davem@...emloft.net, 
 edumazet@...gle.com, 
 kuba@...nel.org, 
 pabeni@...hat.com, 
 ast@...nel.org, 
 daniel@...earbox.net, 
 andrii@...nel.org, 
 martin.lau@...ux.dev, 
 eddyz87@...il.com, 
 song@...nel.org, 
 yonghong.song@...ux.dev, 
 john.fastabend@...il.com, 
 kpsingh@...nel.org, 
 sdf@...ichev.me, 
 haoluo@...gle.com, 
 jolsa@...nel.org, 
 mykolal@...com, 
 shuah@...nel.org, 
 hawk@...nel.org, 
 marcus.wichelmann@...zner-cloud.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/6] selftests/bpf: move open_tuntap to
 network helpers

Marcus Wichelmann wrote:
> To test the XDP metadata functionality of the tun driver, it's necessary
> to create a new tap device first. A helper function for this already
> exists in lwt_helpers.h. Move it to the common network helpers header,
> so it can be reused in other tests.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Marcus Wichelmann <marcus.wichelmann@...zner-cloud.de>

Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>

Both tests that include lwt_helpers.h also include network_helpers.h,
so the linking with network_helpers.o is already addressed. This was
not entirely obvious from just reading the code.