On 06/15/2018 12:30 AM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote: > On Thu, Jun 14, 2018 at 05:01:06AM -0700, William Tu wrote: >> Make the printting of bpf xfrm tunnel better and >> cleanup xfrm state and policy when xfrm test finishes. > LGTM. The subject tag actually meant s/bpf-net/bpf-next/? > > It makes sense to be in bpf-next but I think bpf-next is still closed. > Please repost later.
But given this fixes up missing cleanup of xfrm policy/state that was added earlier as part of the test, I think bpf would be fine. (Subject is a bit confusing indeed either bpf resp. net tree or bpf-next was meant.) Thanks, Daniel
