[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251119185135.433c9bea@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 18:51:35 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: I Viswanath <viswanathiyyappan@...il.com>
Cc: andrew+netdev@...n.ch, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, mst@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com, eperezma@...hat.com, sdf@...ichev.me,
kuniyu@...gle.com, skhawaja@...gle.com, aleksander.lobakin@...el.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux.dev, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFT net-next v4 0/2] net: Split ndo_set_rx_mode into snapshot
and deferred write
On Wed, 19 Nov 2025 09:27:58 +0530 I Viswanath wrote:
> > Also I'm not sure what you mean by RFT, doubt anyone will test this
> > for you, and you're modifying virtio which you should be able to test
> > yourself.. RFC or PATCH is the choice.
>
> Just to be clear, would testing packet flow with all the possible mode
> combinations
> under heavy traffic be sufficient and exhaustive? I think this should
> be PATCH once I sort everything out
I don't think traffic matters all that much, we're talking about control
path change. It's more important to exercise all the address lists
(l2 unicast, multicast) and rx modes (promisc, allmulti) etc.
Then whatever other paths may load to touching the relevant state in
the driver (eg virtnet_freeze_down(), not triggers that, suspend?,
migration?).
In terms of traffic simple ping or a few UDP packets would be enough,
mostly to confirm the filtering is working as expected.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists