On Wed, Aug 14, 2024 at 06:14 PM +02, Michal Luczaj wrote: > On 8/6/24 19:45, Jakub Sitnicki wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 06, 2024 at 07:18 PM +02, Michal Luczaj wrote: >>> Great, thanks for the review. With this completed, I guess we can unwind >>> the (mail) stack to [1]. Is that ingress-to-local et al. something you >>> wanted to take care of yourself or can I give it a try? >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/87msmqn9ws....@cloudflare.com/ >> >> I haven't stated any work on. You're welcome to tackle that. >> >> All I have is a toy test that I've used to generate the redirect matrix. >> Perhaps it can serve as inspiration: >> >> https://github.com/jsitnicki/sockmap-redir-matrix > > All right, please let me know if this is more or less what you meant and > I'll post the whole series for a review (+patch to purge sockmap_listen of > redir tests, fix misnomers). Mostly I've just copypasted your code > (mangling it terribly along the way), so I feel silly claiming the > authorship. Should I assign you as an author?
Don't worry about it. I appreciate the help. I will take a look at the redirect tests this weekend. > Note that the patches are based on [2], which has not reached bpf-next > (patchwork says: "Needs ACK"). > > [2] [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/6] selftests/bpf: Various sockmap-related fixes > > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240731-selftest-sockmap-fixes-v2-0-08a0c73ab...@rbox.co/ Might have slipped throught the cracks... Andrii, Martin, The patch set still applies cleanly to bpf-next. Would you be able to a look at this series? Anything we need to do? Thanks, (the other) Jakub
