Wang Zhan wrote: > On Wed, 30 Sep 2026 15:53:09 -0400 Willem de Bruijn wrote: > > Given that we have the above (concise) testcases: > > > > Do we need to add the below verbose code? What does it add, just the > > TCP specific path? > > gso_test_tcp_resegment() is a v1 leftover, when tcp_gso_segment() needed a > max_segs exception in its "untrusted source" check. max_segs is passed > through now, so it is unnecessary and can be dropped in v5. > > gso_test_tcp_limit_l3_proto() was added in v3 for the L3 protocol limit > lookup fix (1/5). > > gso_test_tcp_resegment_l3_len() was added in v3 for the 64 KiB cap on the > grouped output (4/5), from this sashiko report on v2: > https://lore.kernel.org/[email protected]/ > > You are right that they are verbose and one-off. I do not have a concrete > plan > yet: I will try to trim them, or just drop them and add a selftest later. Any > suggestions?
The trade-off in added coverage vs added test code (that also has a maintenance cost) is subjective. I would maybe ask the LLM whether it can generate a significantly more concise test that gives the same coverage. Initially they don't see to optimize for size. It has worked for me before. Otherwise, I'd drop 64KB limit test gso_test_tcp_resegment_l3_len, and possibly both. But as said subjective, your call. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
