[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190530.115628.608991171678851481.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 11:56:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com
Cc: dsahern@...il.com, dsahern@...nel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
idosch@...lanox.com, saeedm@...lanox.com, kafai@...com,
weiwan@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] net: add struct nexthop to fib{6}_info
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 11:27:23 -0700
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:01 AM David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>
>> From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
>> Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 08:18:10 -0700
>>
>> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 8:16 AM David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 5/30/19 9:06 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>> >> > Huge number of core changes and zero tests.
>> >>
>> >> As mentioned in a past response, there are a number of tests under
>> >> selftests that exercise the code paths affected by this change.
>> >
>> > I see zero new tests added.
>>
>> If the existing tests give sufficient coverage, your objections are not
>> reasonable Alexei.
>
> I completely disagree. Existing tests are not sufficient.
> It is a new feature for the kernel with corresponding iproute2 new features,
> yet there are zero tests.
Ok, that's tree, and I agree.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists