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?
