From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from vps0.lunn.ch (vps0.lunn.ch [156.67.10.101]) (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 EE34528C037; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 13:36:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=156.67.10.101 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749648994; cv=none; b=C5zjstb2lidWxf94a/8mvFvB/jn7k+ss+PLHIbTbINsswgrzSsWr4pxxW61/f7Xzx7Wxd9wYj0O37NYRqCxZPFv6ddzqHGYHfo6+O5EiNS2sY1Pf+NemYapINXkMf3PFcWGlEh/NgeInd8iFivhrjFwBHzw2qKUiAZMEAOKmO/k= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1749648994; c=relaxed/simple; bh=qxeEX+fpLYiFMxZjd8T8WFKqd8/tarfK/1nXUbP+oow=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=m3j494GdEfFM+myfAyp1KgSww09c9Std2z4DlzRW+FVccuPOL8zPMBIBCkX1nQwzKGfxOVWxIptZA8Sjx0kqUPBrDXbITh9irD/WVft2V/24ysPIM1FojuaPgbNE07+8Sy8jDkWMkp2JuBov0mQEuqbiZ7EtG9VSaUvTXLA6JMo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lunn.ch; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lunn.ch; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lunn.ch header.i=@lunn.ch header.b=DVgMGJU0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=156.67.10.101 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=lunn.ch Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lunn.ch Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=lunn.ch header.i=@lunn.ch header.b="DVgMGJU0" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lunn.ch; s=20171124; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Disposition:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject: Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:References; bh=vVK1lv1eg0ugU/Wlcq0qw8RSX2k3WrhR6fk/iNeFFPc=; b=DVgMGJU05gH/oIK5E5D9B47wVC GIR3UdOd8V+Wd5k0QiTngzWgSaDshWYZqcxKeXPOgRgvN7NV/q6mfkM2faOnAzMEBNdMRH/wAYIvp dZxers4Mp06vL74YaphTtZ+8PSeLS76pFIIro7UzfXnc0Ong0p1ps2qiJrDJOOtQYGcM=; Received: from andrew by vps0.lunn.ch with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1uPLcV-00FOq5-P6; Wed, 11 Jun 2025 15:35:59 +0200 Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 15:35:59 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn To: Gal Pressman Cc: Kory Maincent , Paolo Abeni , Oleksij Rempel , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Jonathan Corbet , Donald Hunter , Rob Herring , Andrew Lunn , Simon Horman , Heiner Kallweit , Russell King , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Conor Dooley , Liam Girdwood , Mark Brown , Thomas Petazzoni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, Kyle Swenson , Dent Project , kernel@pengutronix.de, Maxime Chevallier , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Krzysztof Kozlowski Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v12 00/13] Add support for PSE budget evaluation strategy Message-ID: <78daedb4-afe7-429d-9447-a3f76ea65e16@lunn.ch> References: <20250524-feature_poe_port_prio-v12-0-d65fd61df7a7@bootlin.com> <8b3cdc35-8bcc-41f6-84ec-aee50638b929@redhat.com> <71dc12de-410d-4c69-84c5-26c1a5b3fa6e@nvidia.com> <20250609103622.7e7e471d@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390> <20250609160346.39776688@kmaincent-XPS-13-7390> <0ba3c459-f95f-483e-923d-78bf406554ea@nvidia.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 09:05:01AM +0300, Gal Pressman wrote: > On 09/06/2025 18:12, Andrew Lunn wrote: > >> I think that in theory the userspace patches need to be posted together > >> with the kernel, from maintainer-netdev.rst: > >> > >> User space code exercising kernel features should be posted > >> alongside kernel patches. This gives reviewers a chance to see > >> how any new interface is used and how well it works. > >> > >> I am not sure if that's really the case though. > > > > The ethtool Maintainer tends to wait to the end of the cycle to pick > > up all patches and then applies and releases a new ethtool binary. The > > same applies for iproute2. That means the CI tests are not capable of > > testing new features using ethtool. I'm also not sure if it needs a > > human to update the ethtool binary on the CI systems, and how active > > that human is. Could this be changed, sure, if somebody has the needed > > bandwidth. > > > > Using the APIs directly via ynl python is possible in CI, since that > > is all in tree, as far as i know. However, ethtool is the primary user > > tool, so i do see having tests for it as useful. But they might need > > to wait for a cycle, or at least fail gracefully until the ethtool > > binary is updated. > > Thanks Andrew, so I interpret this as selftests should be added when the > userspace patches get accepted (or released?)? Not part of the original > kernel submission? I personally would submit the tests at the same time, but make them gracefully fail when the ethtool binary is too old. As a reviewer, seeing the tests as well and the ethtool patches and the kernel code gives me a warm fuzzy feeling the overall quality is good, the new code is actually tested, etc and the code should be merged. Andrew