From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C40C95B21A; Sun, 6 Sep 2026 13:56:47 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788703008; cv=none; b=p4GEUBVnvSRyD860WELz3wUQ/Kttujs5faR963fzln33Jdoe7e2mQc2BIRhtlX66qWHA4kDTmJ13fCPZkQjio1FT6a/F5xsSeuKrV/lSFX+THnW4yE8pnNnzgtvvUyV4Oh6EXS4coBXeSReQ9xBm2k70hW7qCl1XcD+Y+6bWFfE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1788703008; c=relaxed/simple; bh=vb5ltAB6HXEirqVV/IKzVOZrN5l5GeUIZevMJsER5J8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=dJjmGOijQnsR07CrY0s86MyizztxpCPqAZnzaw5JGichJF32ivBRmU59WfBvRRmhkPT4ymO0WMgf3KJD/b4mQK9Ui9mxLpqxdGmi0G1d31lJsG1qhTh7xnqKpOrlazwrMz7CJgXkWI9ej92cqA3cE+FRz4EwKxrf2GO0I3CvjuA= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=I9gvx7RZ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="I9gvx7RZ" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C321D1F00A3A; Sun, 6 Sep 2026 13:56:46 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1788703007; bh=vb5ltAB6HXEirqVV/IKzVOZrN5l5GeUIZevMJsER5J8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date; b=I9gvx7RZdcixzco1WFo5Vq90ErkRkPAlXKvHA2DZWu/4vr2clOmnW0LFgoMbK5m3L qwdACvpi85TbHApA7/CeIw/bDveGMcqR9kYIytBHliNspg4hX0ir/n/gvF1as0JPP2 I8NJ8SCC4z+MfxKHEsWub2zkWJ6Qkor5Y6ghgSNP6NQ/yCfmnoIoZFOoijMDcQXgUd N/TguHwmoI3Ov1EmBpy5W3uDFDiFJaVik88jIQJVp8sj2zjyEqWyzU8RoYVNl8o6pP yty3Kdgkh+hsYkFwSPQhn3uZyKPZBLl3iFL2PfNDsq/uBJcXWRczdbFUJMkwzbqUYQ 3wW4nu9ne/1HQ== From: =?utf-8?B?QmrDtnJuIFTDtnBlbA==?= To: Maciej Fijalkowski , Jakub Kicinski Cc: Paolo Abeni , Tushar Vyavahare , netdev@vger.kernel.org, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, stfomichev@gmail.com, kernelxing@tencent.com, davem@davemloft.net, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, tirthendu.sarkar@intel.com, andrii@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/4] selftests/xsk: improve shared-UMEM coverage In-Reply-To: References: <20260819024443.781764-1-tushar.vyavahare@intel.com> <20260820104419.050cbc44@kernel.org> <20260820142920.6c96ec67@kernel.org> Date: Sun, 06 Sep 2026 15:56:41 +0200 Message-ID: <878q5epjom.fsf@all.your.base.are.belong.to.us> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Maciej Fijalkowski writes: > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 02:29:20PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 19:53:00 +0200 Maciej Fijalkowski wrote: >> > On Thu, Aug 20, 2026 at 10:44:19AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >> > > On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 11:35:53 +0200 Paolo Abeni wrote:=20=20 >> > > > ## Form letter - net-next-closed=20=20 >> > >=20 >> > > these are bpf patches. Tushar, tools/testing/selftests/bpf is BPF=20= =20 >> >=20 >> > But AF_XDP is now net target since some time. Should we move the test >> > suite out of bpf directory then? >>=20 >> True.. but until the move happens it feels a little awkward >> taking pure ksft/bpf patches via net-next? > > CC: Bjorn > > We had a talk about potential next steps and what would take to get this > test suite executed against HW tests. tl;dr version is that some of the > work is needed to adjust it from infrastructure POV as currently > xskxceiver runs as a single process with two separate threads and what > Bjorn was saying we will rather be needing two standalone processes that > could be used on DUT and packet generator. Yeah, that matches what I had in mind -- for HW tests, the two endpoints need to be independently runnable processes. One runs on the DUT, and the other on the peer/traffic generator. IOW, the existing tool needs to support such a setup, which is a move awway from the two-thread setup. I'm still not convinced that this would be this tool, or something else (new). Again, restructuring is definitely a follow-up, and should not block the shared-UMEM work. Also, the move from selftest/bpf can also be handled separately. Bj=C3=B6rn