On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 3:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Jan 2026 15:32:00 +0100 [email protected] > wrote: > > From: Chia-Yu Chang <[email protected]> > > > > Hello, > > > > Plesae find the v10 AccECN case handling patch series, which covers > > several excpetional case handling of Accurate ECN spec (RFC9768), > > adds new identifiers to be used by CC modules, adds ecn_delta into > > rate_sample, and keeps the ACE counter for computation, etc. > > Looks like we went in the wrong directions, multiple tests are failing > now: > > https://netdev.bots.linux.dev/contest.html?branch=net-next-2026-01-21--18-00&executor=vmksft-packetdrill&pw-n=0&pass=0
Looks like the first two are failing because the v10 series has a different layout for tcp_info than what packetdrill currently expects: https://netdev-ctrl.bots.linux.dev/logs/vmksft/packetdrill/results/483641/30-tcp-accecn-delivered-updates-pkt/stdout https://netdev-ctrl.bots.linux.dev/logs/vmksft/packetdrill/results/483641/58-tcp-accecn-delivered-falseoverflow-detect-pkt/stdout Chia-Yu, can you please post a patch for packetdrill to make it expect the new layout from the v10 series? For the third one: https://netdev-ctrl.bots.linux.dev/logs/vmksft/packetdrill/results/483641/69-tcp-accecn-client-accecn-options-lost-pkt/stdout ... it looks like the test line that says: +.002 ... 0.052 connect(4, ..., ...) = 0 needs to be changed to: +.002 ... 0.102 connect(4, ..., ...) = 0 It seems like running the tests before emailing the patches should have caught these 3 issues? Chia-Yu, can you please make sure you run all the AccECN packetdrill tests with the latest kernel and latest packetdrill binary you are proposing, before posting a v11 kernel patch series and packetdrill patch? Thanks, neal
