[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250711101415.6ae42daf@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2025 10:14:15 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni
<pabeni@...hat.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Simon Horman
<horms@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
kernel-team@...a.com, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 3/3] selftests: net: add netpoll basic
functionality test
On Fri, 11 Jul 2025 09:05:11 -0700 Breno Leitao wrote:
> + rxq = ethtool_result["rx"]
> + txq = ethtool_result["tx"]
Most HW NICs will actually use the "combined" channels (which have both
rx and tx ring on one NAPI).
> + logging.debug("calling: ethtool %s", cmdline)
ksft_pr() ?
We had a plan to add a verbose() helper which would still be
TAP-compatible, but never finished the patches.
Either way, would you mind respinning the series (without the 24h wait)?
It conflicts with another series which adds a bpftool() helper.
I applied that patch so you should see a trivial conflict when rebasing.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists