linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/8] selftest: Extend tun/virtio coverage for GSO over UDP tunnel

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAA92Kxmdcc01B0p8jK3JM-ot+LzdnCwS8utAtFe7bBg1ymqT5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2026 10:09:58 +0800
From: Xu Du <xudu@...hat.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org, shuah@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 0/8] selftest: Extend tun/virtio coverage for
 GSO over UDP tunnel

On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 10:59 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Xu Du wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 7, 2026 at 6:58 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, 06 Jan 2026 17:14:05 -0500 Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > For instance, can the new netlink code be replaced by YNL, whether in
> > > > C or called from a script?
> > >
> > > +1 looks like YNL is already used in net/ tests, and it supports
> > > the operations in question, so that's a much better direction.
> > > Please let us (YNL maintainers) know if there's anything missing
> > > or not working, IDK how much use the rtnetlink support in YNL is
> > > getting.
> > >
> >
> > Thank you for the suggestion. I am looking into replacing the netlink
> > with YNL to reduce code. But after reviewing rt-link.rst, I found that
> > rt-link currently lacks support for VXLAN. Would more significant changes
> >  to the patch be acceptable if I switch to Geneve to leverage YNL?
>
> These are only changes to the new code in your series. SGTM. I assume
> it is not a significant burden as the two are fairly similar. Is that
> correct?
>
> Eventually it may be nice to have VXLAN support in YNL akin to Geneve
> support. But sounds like a separate goal.
>

I think it is not a significant burden. I will perform some internal
testing first.

-- 


Regards,

Xu


--

Xu Du

Quality Engineer, RHEL Network QE

Raycom, Beijing, China