Hi Kevin,

> On Mar 7, 2018, at 12:07, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant 
> <ke...@darbyshire-bryant.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 7 Mar 2018, at 10:31, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> wrote:
>> Please don't put something different into LEDE than what we're working
>> on upstreaming. It is difficult enough to keep track of the different
>> versions as they are. The tc-adv repo is already rebased on the upstream
>> iproute2-next, so if there is anything else that needs to be changed, it
>> should be changed in that repo and not in a fork...
>> -Toke
> Received & understood.  Not sending to lede… probably a good idea anyway as 
> the main stats (not tin stats) are broken for me.  I wonder if this is 
> because q_cake has to be imported to lede as a patch applied on top of 
> whatever iproute2 version they’re using as the base?

Will you update the sch_cake ad tc patches (from tc-adv) for lede? That would 
be most excellent, as currently the overhead accountin of the cake in 
lede/openwrt is, let's say, interesting ;) (and since I try to support people 
in the forums I would very much like to not having to explain this especially 
since Jonathan really seems ti have squashed that (but to fully confirm that, I 
really want to get feedback from diverse group of lede cake-eaters ;)))

Best Regards

> Cheers,
> Kevin D-B
> 012C ACB2 28C6 C53E 9775  9123 B3A2 389B 9DE2 334A
> _______________________________________________
> Cake mailing list
> Cake@lists.bufferbloat.net
> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cake

Cake mailing list

Reply via email to