[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d7faeacc-0442-4cee-a0ae-4b39b75d0cda@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2024 11:17:39 +0200
From: Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>,
Geliang Tang <geliang@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@...inos.cn>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/2] mptcp: add last time fields in mptcp_info
Hi Jakub,
On 10/04/2024 23:01, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Apr 2024 21:31:13 +0200 (GMT+02:00) Matthieu Baerts wrote:
>>> Hi Mat, is this causing skips in selftests by any chance?
>>>
>>> # 07 ....chk last_data_sent [SKIP] Feature probably not supported
>>> # 08 ....chk last_data_recv [SKIP] Feature probably not supported
>>> # 09 ....chk last_ack_recv [SKIP] Feature probably not supported
>>
>> Yes it does, I should have added a note about that, sorry: that's because
>> SS needs to be patched as well to display the new counters.
>>
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/mptcp/patch/fd9e850f1e00691204f1dfebc63c01c6a4318c10.1711705327.git.geliang@kernel.org/
>>
>> This patch will be sent when the kernel one will be accepted.
>
> I see, applied locally now, thanks!
Thank you!
>> Is it an issue? The modification of the selftests can be applied later
>> if you prefer.
>
> Not sure. If it doesn't happen super often maybe co-post the iproute2
> patch as described:
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainer-netdev.html#co-posting-changes-to-user-space-components
> and I'll apply it on the worker machines manually.
I missed that. Indeed, that should be rare. We will do that next time!
>> Earlier today, I was looking at changing NIPA not to mark the whole
>> selftest as "SKIP" but I saw it was not a bug: a check is there to
>> mark everything as skipped if one subtest is marked as skipped
>> from what I understood. So I guess we don't want to change that :)
>
> Correct :) It's working as intended :)
It can maybe be modified when we can re-use the option to parse embedded
TAP results :)
>>> I'll "hide it" from patchwork for now..
>>> --
>>> pw-bot: defer
>>
>> Thank you! Do you prefer if I resend only patch 1/2 for now?
>
> No need, restored the patches back, let's see if next run is clean.
Thank you! It looks like they are OK now!
Cheers,
Matt
--
Sponsored by the NGI0 Core fund.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists