netdev - 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.24d5d52e43030@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2026 09:59:36 -0500
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Xu Du <xudu@...hat.com>, 
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, 
 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

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.