From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a6-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.157]) (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 2E83A2EF673 for ; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 13:06:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762261593; cv=none; b=FLJyNwGazPUSezKT8rvurDEvpZGTOB2vcsXvARxqtsXH0G78uxaXjzUGdcmJhGiYCzRFbhwDtAzn6EUzZp7aTurY8Gnz0Gqb7NENEQGqDpr61zcZOHO9GNIrrO4AIcq92Q3b6PtSnq3tbwDK5jhqTEA1PgtmHy2D1rB2kvQQQdE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762261593; c=relaxed/simple; bh=N5i0G9es6ZPdEIUdkAOy469147POAtJKLyrNKXj2Dig=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=S95M/ZLldbTeFbt49mAuvN8UrOBWFBfUxuAN3tc/w6quTYoPkC9XcfoDjXNriGMG25QbSGR3HyjshdeCw/aOt1K5PQ3GDf5Gd5batCaYzDEJAH8ThQdAFJX0vSZ8clS7eb/UuRhQfZDmHad+Sr6HrmHUHBPLuAjpjt6zidQG1WU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b=B/gPhuaQ; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=r9go7fvT; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.157 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=queasysnail.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=queasysnail.net header.i=@queasysnail.net header.b="B/gPhuaQ"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="r9go7fvT" Received: from phl-compute-09.internal (phl-compute-09.internal [10.202.2.49]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id E837D140008D; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 08:06:28 -0500 (EST) Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-09.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 04 Nov 2025 08:06:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=queasysnail.net; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1762261588; x= 1762347988; bh=Md/gptcmWfqaz7Ki3U+MPXBhkdFklc+v0RNkKyUNsrA=; b=B /gPhuaQKpdPwOxGYpTX1AEtBgIZfAWKD0BcPUVsBIrdw1HqNfcNk3FfG5kEY/3MD x3LiltFam1W0zIBAkCsqgxcC4OiyjhOp3vgiI+xM3t5hCuAjZ69IapTnG3WI18oK PUh90htVI2DVqn92rex2mJY2hp8WwS1ism11EjzC0c8Zmpar7gdMa5KArOijtRQO m97eGekSYLUy2cU4qfdOJ72In7F5MuMYbCHO8l9V/0jVRzDSWq0VWEv+4sDBspC4 LiwBEN/eWSOaSk3C9vtZ9jXLlvU0u4myOFfK9HXMSALzysoHwd+StCoX7OLow+8j KARiXxn1mj1ed9O2L7ZUg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1762261588; x=1762347988; bh=Md/gptcmWfqaz7Ki3U+MPXBhkdFklc+v0RN kKyUNsrA=; b=r9go7fvT8JeML+N850XzrnFfBfQNbCF+PMuTFCdtFaeBcEjG/yx f+uiPi6JrVu+Uyq124j8WrZIaenDFHfx4YCVkd1IQJh/3HI3IzZ0rnytLXl09fKL 47pf9LBPEBtxlbrBaVUMRZgux+MV2ZshsA5iXrYruzGLxVhkZVTIbWJRC3ErwELU j1+IJqAoZUFqqgrpA/JwZsAdeNoxdBPP1HHAEeirvTK7CkhkBQBkXD0m3MFya1v+ FtuG+e8iff61/gPJM5RJDe3zm7+SoWBLPMkEFa7sWhHfkRxMiGLv7rAV7GLAuh+K wH6nQUvq310COFYKFpBNzf+tm1DjS6fiLcA== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggddukedutdelucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceu rghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujf gurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtjeenucfhrhhomhepufgrsghrihhn rgcuffhusghrohgtrgcuoehsugesqhhuvggrshihshhnrghilhdrnhgvtheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhepuefhhfffgfffhfefueeiudegtdefhfekgeetheegheeifffguedvueff fefgudffnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomh epshgusehquhgvrghshihsnhgrihhlrdhnvghtpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeegpdhmohgu vgepshhmthhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopegushgrhhgvrhhnsehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrgh dprhgtphhtthhopehsthgvphhhvghnsehnvghtfihorhhkphhluhhmsggvrhdrohhrghdp rhgtphhtthhopehnvghtuggvvhesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtth hopehsthgvfhhfvghnrdhklhgrshhsvghrthesshgvtghunhgvthdrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i934648bf:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Tue, 4 Nov 2025 08:06:27 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 14:06:25 +0100 From: Sabrina Dubroca To: David Ahern Cc: Stephen Hemminger , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Steffen Klassert Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next] ip-xfrm: add pcpu-num support Message-ID: References: <2623d62913de4f0e5e1d6a8b8cbcab4a9508c324.1761735750.git.sd@queasysnail.net> <20251030090615.28552eeb@phoenix> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: 2025-11-03, 09:36:28 -0700, David Ahern wrote: > On 11/3/25 2:48 AM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > 2025-10-30, 19:32:10 -0600, David Ahern wrote: > >> On 10/30/25 5:51 PM, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > >>> With the netlink specs project, it's also maybe less attractive? > >>> (netlink spec for ipsec is also on my todo list and I've given > >>> it a look, ipxfrm conversion is probably easier) > >>> > >> > >> That is an interesting question. I guess it depends on the long term > >> expectations for the tooling. There is a lot to like about the specs. > >> Does Red Hat include the commands in recent RHEL releases? ie., do we > >> know of it gaining traction in the more "popular" OS releases? > > > > Yes, it's present in the latest RHEL release and recent Fedoras. > > (no idea what Debian and Ubuntu do) > > > > That's a start. From there we need to figure out adoption rate. The > legacy arp and ifconfig tools are still widely used despite requests to > move to ip meaning habits are to break. Ugh :/ > I would give the netlink spec priority. Ok. I may end up doing the ipxfrm json conversion alongside anyway. For the macsec spec I've been working on (still WIP), I've used the json output of iproute to create some tests that compare it to the ynl output (with some massaging required because the json objects end up with slightly different names), which pointed out some mistakes in the spec. So I'll likely do the same kind of testing for xfrm specs when I get to that stage. -- Sabrina