From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9E42CC432C3 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75B8920727 for ; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:18:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="G/VcAJft" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726461AbfKRISb (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:18:31 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:47275 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726316AbfKRISb (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:18:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1574065110; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=3MvS3Pykn8mQZTc6+4LMgBcmRIMAtBNaV6FFky/nJNg=; b=G/VcAJftYbDn0PfKPblB4CwOzlZP/qHPZ3ogxY63vT3Yr7hhMfs8VKRSMBVh9pthTRyxWP xWAVvd9vMtcvLvc+Qs8RGwzNYZL2/ZvlTtW4J0woyubfaFGxKvVIchiKU1SrDQSxOdvEx6 0LKj9zl7+sx+AsP6AagvAlCl/pJPN9A= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-382-3TMTSlgDM9aNXxUXH_Ks5Q-1; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 03:18:25 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx03.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.13]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E9A50801FA1; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:18:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (ovpn-204-195.brq.redhat.com [10.40.204.195]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE68060856; Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:18:22 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2019 09:18:21 +0100 From: Jiri Benc To: Daniel Borkmann Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alan Maguire Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] selftests: bpf: xdping is not meant to be run standalone Message-ID: <20191118091821.4a1b3faf@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <427e0b06-679e-5621-f828-be545e6ca3b1@iogearbox.net> References: <4365c81198f62521344c2215909634407184387e.1573821726.git.jbenc@redhat.com> <427e0b06-679e-5621-f828-be545e6ca3b1@iogearbox.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.13 X-MC-Unique: 3TMTSlgDM9aNXxUXH_Ks5Q-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 15 Nov 2019 23:06:13 +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Any objections if I take this to bpf-next as otherwise this will create a= n ugly > merge conflict between bpf and bpf-next given selftests have been heavily= reworked > in there. Should I resend against bpf-next? Jiri