Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 2/20/24 12:23 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >> Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> On 2/19/24 7:52 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: >>>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >>>> >>>>> Now that we have a system-wide page pool, we can use that for the live >>>>> frame mode of BPF_TEST_RUN (used by the XDP traffic generator), and >>>>> avoid the cost of creating a separate page pool instance for each >>>>> syscall invocation. See the individual patches for more details. >>>>> >>>>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen (3): >>>>> net: Register system page pool as an XDP memory model >>>>> bpf: test_run: Use system page pool for XDP live frame mode >>>>> bpf: test_run: Fix cacheline alignment of live XDP frame data >>>>> structures >>>>> >>>>> include/linux/netdevice.h | 1 + >>>>> net/bpf/test_run.c | 138 +++++++++++++++++++------------------- >>>>> net/core/dev.c | 13 +++- >>>>> 3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 71 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> Hi maintainers >>>> >>>> This series is targeting net-next, but it's listed as delegate:bpf in >>>> patchwork[0]; is that a mistake? Do I need to do anything more to nudge it >>>> along? >>> >>> I moved it over to netdev, it would be good next time if there are dependencies >>> which are in net-next but not yet bpf-next to clearly state them given from this >>> series the majority touches the bpf test infra code. >> >> Right, I thought that was what I was doing by targeting them at net-next >> (in the subject). What's the proper way to do this, then, just noting it >> in the cover letter? :) > > An explicit lore link to the series this depends on would be best. Alright; seems I'm respinning anyway, so will add one in the next revision :) -Toke
