From: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@znyx.com>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
Thomas Cataldo <tomc@compaqnet.fr>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: Hard freeze with 2.6.10-rc3 and QoS, worked fine with 2.6.9
Date: 07 Dec 2004 23:41:53 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1102480913.1049.24.camel@jzny.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1102480044.1050.9.camel@jzny.localdomain>
BTW, old kernel in this case implies one that does not support tc
actions at all. So pick something like 2.4.28.
New is whatever 2.6.x with patch.
Old tc is something that for example ships with redhat
new tc is whatever one is patched.
Supplementary tests are: in 2.6.x to compile the policer
in two different ways a) via tc actions and b) using the old scheme
which is understood by "old" tc. Repeat the tests i described earlier
with b) pretending to be "old" kernel.
Infact come to think of it i would also prefer to have the suplementary
tests run as well.
If you guys have no cycles, please pass the patch to me and i will test
on the weekend.
cheers,
jamal
On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 23:27, jamal wrote:
> On Tue, 2004-12-07 at 12:23, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
> > Either one is fine with me, although I would prefer to see
> > the number of ifdefs in this area going down, not up :)
>
> You guys pick one or other or a mix. I run 4 base testcases for the
> policer typically:
>
> 1) Old kernel, uptodate TC - MUST pass
> 2) old kernel, old tc (trivial - expected to pass).
> 3) New Kernel, uptodate TC - MUST pass
> 4) New Kernel, uptodate TC - MUST pass (although trivial)
>
> Try both setting, dumping then deleting policies.
>
> If these tests pass, please push patch to Dave.
>
> cheers,
> jamal
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-12-08 4:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-12-07 0:47 Thomas Cataldo
2004-12-07 6:35 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-12-07 6:44 ` Andrew Morton
2004-12-07 12:29 ` jamal
2004-12-07 16:59 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-12-07 17:07 ` Thomas Graf
2004-12-07 17:23 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-12-08 4:27 ` jamal
2004-12-08 4:41 ` Jamal Hadi Salim [this message]
2004-12-08 5:17 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-12-08 12:31 ` jamal
2004-12-08 14:32 ` Thomas Graf
2004-12-08 14:59 ` Thomas Graf
2004-12-08 15:06 ` jamal
2004-12-08 15:05 ` jamal
2004-12-08 17:30 ` Thomas Graf
2004-12-08 5:30 ` David S. Miller
2004-12-08 12:04 ` jamal
2004-12-08 16:57 ` Patrick McHardy
2004-12-08 19:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
2004-12-08 19:49 ` jamal
2004-12-08 19:44 ` jamal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1102480913.1049.24.camel@jzny.localdomain \
--to=hadi@znyx.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
--cc=tgraf@suug.ch \
--cc=tomc@compaqnet.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®