From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: From: Sven Eckelmann Date: Tue, 03 May 2016 14:32:28 +0200 Message-ID: <10228266.x0VlN5ZfLu@bentobox> In-Reply-To: <5437772.flAExnCRQc@prime> References: <1894217.a7ufKNXfSr@bentobox> <5437772.flAExnCRQc@prime> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart11426593.zHV3OZ73mV"; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" Subject: Re: [B.A.T.M.A.N.] [v3] Add throughput meter support List-Id: The list for a Better Approach To Mobile Ad-hoc Networking List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Simon Wunderlich Cc: b.a.t.m.a.n@lists.open-mesh.org --nextPart11426593.zHV3OZ73mV Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" On Tuesday 03 May 2016 13:28:16 Simon Wunderlich wrote: > On Tuesday 03 May 2016 10:59:07 Sven Eckelmann wrote: > > Hi, > > > > here is the third version of the throughput meter support. It is just a > > rebased version of the patchset with two little bugfixes. Both problems were > > detected and reported by Antonio: > > > > * batctl didn't check if the test_time is > 0 before doing a division > > * batman-adv wasn't returning an error to batctl when dst was not reachable > > > > > > I am currently unsure how we should proceed regarding the ICMP packet type > > used to communicate to the userspace ([PATCH 2/3]). Andrew+Matthias already > > prepared a netlink patchset which looks quite good and which should be > > tested+applied. The consequence for this patchset would be that patch 2 > > should be completely dropped and instead the tp_meter should become its own > > command in the netlink interface of batman-adv. Any opinions about that > > (order in which patches should be applied/netlink interface should be > > handled) by the Simon, Antonio, Marek, Matthias or Andrew? > > Thanks for preparing the patchset! Antonio, Marek and me discussed and agreed > that we should adopt the patchset as it is, and have the netlink support > additionally at a later point. Did read Antonio the comment in the internal ticket? Kind regards, Sven --nextPart11426593.zHV3OZ73mV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAABCgAGBQJXKJpcAAoJEF2HCgfBJntGkboQAKOzgLtxqlsmMNf3abZ1Ih/Q 6h4NdDUN+Q/M7ur84oEByQ267bBv5/beUEv+yXZwoMKY8tTtBor/KWXBNbwObJn7 ia1jeBHa4UHMaF59SoKrMZrE0Y59KmpZL+gNRLDn0En3bIL46Pnr4gJHl4SVpXOI 5Pqg+99UhV4Ni5ccBoUDfLfXUFaS/WsN/xPQjvukdUd6S0WlE94V1J6CU/UbcvkS cCCFUVN+dBgqNWKqH0u7kfWcLNG0wbhDMLynPcF5Szq6Q/To9JC52WlZXbLElKeD nRkw6lB2aQpfkE6D/BbLy6q0fHz/7nZiQp7enLvQ2mSwti3CUcSH7GQwf8oJ8m60 dsvv/W3QuPxkgmjIeaztp8TuMuVYep5eYrsr0eaijE2aBTaZuLBRP4wFDJIWVzQU M4rT8b14bQ8Ceo/qgiIZLqlf9H0y8NuibeO0f5WdDF+1D4LGlDXb5RiBN8BIZ+Bz OkmeTePsYSnsxR5OKmIY2YEfBZ7PCnjodZ396nRihaEmwEQkxq8+E2kqRnY7JMVp /PmhoYj/5J5kb/3EpR3iYZcdwULwmxCqFSmnwmz2Nt5SflTDcBjr4u8Q8ezgxCWw cN39GPrQWTLCydCDr+wGOaYPSy+SQdY4Xm9HO7/YZFQyzlCF/ldsZBU6rjkWZZ3L IBlilTU4SCEPImmXCFtn =jqSw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart11426593.zHV3OZ73mV--