Re: [PATCH,net-next,0/2] Improve code coverage of syzkaller

From: Petar Penkov <redacted>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 21:26:14 -0700

Furthermore, in a way testing already requires specific kernel
configuration.  In this particular example, syzkaller prefers
synchronous operation and therefore needs 4KSTACKS disabled. Other
features that require rebuilding are KASAN and dbx. From this point
of view, I still think that having the TUN_NAPI flag has value.

Then I think this path could be enabled/disabled with a runtime flag
just as easily, no?