[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240206075950.47d0bdc7@kernel.org>
Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 07:59:50 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Victor Nogueira <victor@...atatu.com>
Cc: jhs@...atatu.com, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...atatu.com, pctammela@...atatu.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] selftests: tc-testing: add mirred to block tdc
tests
On Mon, 5 Feb 2024 13:28:22 -0300 Victor Nogueira wrote:
> > We merge iproute2 into iprout2-next locally and build the combined
> > thing, FWIW. I haven't solved the problem of pending patches, yet,
> > tho :( If the iproute2-next patches are just on the list but not
> > merged the new tests will fail.
>
> In this case both were merged into -next trees. It's just the executor
> that needed fixing.
> For features merged into net-next but not yet in iproute2-next perhaps
> nipa can be used to catch such issues?
> Should I resend the patch now that the executor is fixed?
Sorry for the delay, I spent too much time migrating workers yesterday
to look at the list.
No need to resend, I'll revive it in patchwork. At least for now contest
keeps retesting the patches so we'll see in ~4h if all is good now.
About catching iproute - yes, we could so something similar to what we
do with netdev patches. Gather everything up from the list. Do basic
sanity checking of the patches. And make a "testing" version of
iproute2. A matter of having the time to do it :( Maybe the iproute2
maintainers would be willing to help?... :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists