Linux Kernel Selftest development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Maurer <fmaurer@redhat.com>
To: Qingfang Deng <qingfang.deng@linux.dev>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>,
	Petr Machata <petrm@nvidia.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: add tests for PPPoL2TP
Date: Wed, 13 May 2026 17:55:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <agSfBWQorPHodayz@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a8036fda-3509-437e-b787-4376992a0359@linux.dev>

On Sat, May 09, 2026 at 09:13:58AM +0800, Qingfang Deng wrote:
> On 2026/5/9 1:26, Felix Maurer wrote:
> > Is there a particular reason to create the test setup with a netkit pair
> > instead of the more standard veth pairs?
>
> L2TP does not need an outer ethernet header so I choose netkit instead of
> veth.

I see, thanks. In my opinion, sticking to the same environment setup for
as many selftests as possible, i.e., using veth pairs everywhere, has
more benefits in terms of maintenance of the test than leaving out the
ethernet header has. Also, while I understand that selftests are only
supported on systems that run with the respective selftest kernel
config, I still think it's good to stick to veth as it is probably
available in more kernel builds (think resource constrained
envrionments, older kernel versions, etc.).

But in the end, it's up to you and the maintainers. However, if you
stick with netkit, please name the interfaces explicitly and don't rely
on the current auto-assigned name of the peer interface.

Thanks,
   Felix


  reply	other threads:[~2026-05-13 15:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-05-08  3:21 [PATCH net-next] selftests: net: add tests for PPPoL2TP Qingfang Deng
2026-05-08 17:26 ` Felix Maurer
2026-05-09  1:13   ` Qingfang Deng
2026-05-13 15:55     ` Felix Maurer [this message]
2026-05-12  8:00 ` Paolo Abeni

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=agSfBWQorPHodayz@thinkpad \
    --to=fmaurer@redhat.com \
    --cc=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=horms@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-ppp@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=petrm@nvidia.com \
    --cc=qingfang.deng@linux.dev \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox