Re: [RFC][PATCH] static builtin CCIDs was Re: [PATCH 2/5] dccp:

Re: [RFC][PATCH] static builtin CCIDs was Re: [PATCH 2/5] dccp:

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 04:20:38PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > IOW we're back to my suggestion on looking at
> > tcp_set_congestion_control(). :-)
> 
> I tried to test this using ttcp over loopback but the tree seems broken
> somehow, with or without this patch I'm getting:
> 
> Could not activate 0 at /home/acme/git/net-next-2.6/net/dccp/feat.c:1176
> 
> I tried doing a quick chase on this one but failed miserably, Gerrit,
> any ideas?

Well, without the patch the problem was that dccp_ccid2 was not being
autoloaded, as soon as I manually loaded it, ttcp worked. Now to see
why...

- Arnaldo

Re: [RFC][PATCH] static builtin CCIDs was Re: [PATCH 2/5] dccp:

[Gerrit Renker]

Quoting Arnaldo:
| Em Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 04:20:38PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
| > > IOW we're back to my suggestion on looking at
| > > tcp_set_congestion_control(). :-)
| > 
| > I tried to test this using ttcp over loopback but the tree seems broken
| > somehow, with or without this patch I'm getting:
| > 
| > Could not activate 0 at /home/acme/git/net-next-2.6/net/dccp/feat.c:1176
| > 
| > I tried doing a quick chase on this one but failed miserably, Gerrit,
| > any ideas?
| 
| Well, without the patch the problem was that dccp_ccid2 was not being
| autoloaded, as soon as I manually loaded it, ttcp worked. Now to see
| why...
I have acked your patch but haven't had time to compile and test it.
Will do this in due course and integrate it into the test tree. 

With regard to the error message, this says that the feature with index 0
could not be activated. According to table 6.4 in RFC 4340 this is a bug
because it tries to activate a reserved feature.

Will do in-depth testing later on today.

Re: [RFC][PATCH] static builtin CCIDs was Re: [PATCH 2/5] dccp:

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo]

Em Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 06:41:10AM +0100, Gerrit Renker escreveu:
> Quoting Arnaldo:
> | Em Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 04:20:38PM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> | > > IOW we're back to my suggestion on looking at
> | > > tcp_set_congestion_control(). :-)
> | > 
> | > I tried to test this using ttcp over loopback but the tree seems broken
> | > somehow, with or without this patch I'm getting:
> | > 
> | > Could not activate 0 at /home/acme/git/net-next-2.6/net/dccp/feat.c:1176
> | > 
> | > I tried doing a quick chase on this one but failed miserably, Gerrit,
> | > any ideas?
> | 
> | Well, without the patch the problem was that dccp_ccid2 was not being
> | autoloaded, as soon as I manually loaded it, ttcp worked. Now to see
> | why...
> I have acked your patch but haven't had time to compile and test it.
> Will do this in due course and integrate it into the test tree. 
> 
> With regard to the error message, this says that the feature with index 0
> could not be activated. According to table 6.4 in RFC 4340 this is a bug

I figured that out later, after some more tweaking and systemtapping it
ended up with index 5 failing and that was the ackvec code that was not
being included, just the stubs that always return NULL on the allocation
routine, after that was fixed by removing CONFIG_IP_DCCP_ACKVEC, i.e.
always including that code since CCID2 now is always included, all
worked with a simple, over loopback, ttcp test.

> because it tries to activate a reserved feature.
 
> Will do in-depth testing later on today.

Thanks!

- Arnaldo