[RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

STALE7487d

5 messages, 4 authors, 2006-03-10 · open the first message on its own page

[RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

From: Adrian Bunk <hidden>
Date: 2006-03-04 16:07:56

This option should IMHO no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL.


Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <redacted>

---

This patch was already sent on:
- 12 Feb 2006
--- linux-2.6.16-rc2-mm1-full/net/sched/Kconfig.old	2006-02-12 02:21:30.000000000 +0100
+++ linux-2.6.16-rc2-mm1-full/net/sched/Kconfig	2006-02-12 02:21:58.000000000 +0100
@@ -434,7 +434,6 @@
 
 config NET_CLS_ACT
 	bool "Actions"
-	depends on EXPERIMENTAL
 	select NET_ESTIMATOR
 	---help---
 	  Say Y here if you want to use traffic control actions. Actions

Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

From: Patrick McHardy <hidden>
Date: 2006-03-04 16:56:30

Adrian Bunk wrote:
This option should IMHO no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL.


Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <redacted>

---

This patch was already sent on:
- 12 Feb 2006
Yesterday I managed to crash my machine playing around with tc actions
within minutes. I haven't looked into it yet, but it seems it still
needs more testing.

Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

From: jamal <hidden>
Date: 2006-03-04 18:52:56

On Sat, 2006-04-03 at 17:56 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
Adrian Bunk wrote:
quoted
This option should IMHO no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL.


Signed-off-by: Adrian Bunk <redacted>

---

This patch was already sent on:
- 12 Feb 2006
Yesterday I managed to crash my machine playing around with tc actions
within minutes. I haven't looked into it yet, but it seems it still
needs more testing.
Simple: Fix the bug and submit a patch. If you cant find the cause post
what you are doing. 

What is the metric for going from experimental to non-experimental?
I surely hope it doesnt come to some irrational reasoning like
"Patrick found a bug"[1]. 
- It has been around since 2.6.7/8;
- I use it extensively on about 10 machines since (I am pretty sure a
lot more extensively than Patrick)
- I know people who use it extensively
- I am pretty sure there are people that i dont know who use it
extensively 

So on Adrian's patch and above reasoning:

ACKed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <redacted>

cheers,
jamal

[1]If you used half of that logic on netfilter it would still be
experimental or rather should be demoted to experimental.

Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

From: Patrick McHardy <hidden>
Date: 2006-03-04 20:37:09

jamal wrote:
On Sat, 2006-04-03 at 17:56 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
quoted
Adrian Bunk wrote:
quoted
This option should IMHO no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL.
Yesterday I managed to crash my machine playing around with tc actions
within minutes. I haven't looked into it yet, but it seems it still
needs more testing.

Simple: Fix the bug and submit a patch. If you cant find the cause post
what you are doing. 
I'll fix it.
What is the metric for going from experimental to non-experimental?
I surely hope it doesnt come to some irrational reasoning like
"Patrick found a bug"[1]. 
I think a sane metric is "opinion of people who know the code". But
I don't care much, I don't think many people care whether something
is maked experimental or not.
[1]If you used half of that logic on netfilter it would still be
experimental or rather should be demoted to experimental.
I'll take that as a compliment :)

Re: [RFC: 2.6 patch] let NET_CLS_ACT no longer depend on EXPERIMENTAL

From: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2006-03-10 11:04:25

From: jamal <redacted>
Date: Sat, 04 Mar 2006 13:52:21 -0500
So on Adrian's patch and above reasoning:

ACKed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <redacted>
Applied, thanks Adrian.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help