On 2011-07-24 10:21 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
On 7/24/11 1:07 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
On 2011-07-24 9:58 PM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
On 7/24/11 2:34 AM, Felix Fietkau wrote:
On 2011-07-22 7:58 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
On 7/6/11 1:41 AM, Philip Prindeville wrote:
Bump to the current version of PPP.
A few of the patches are either in 2.4.5 or something functionally
equivalent is, so those patches were removed.
1 patch was added to accommodate pppol2pv3_addr which is referenced in a
linux kernel header file, but isn't defined in the kernel header files packaged
with PPP.
Signed-off-by: Philip Prindeville<[email protected]>
Can I please get a code review of this?
Here's a few things spotted during review:
- You forgot to refresh the patches, there's lots of fuzz/offsets when
applying them
- The change that removes the exponential backoff during pppoe discovery
was dropped, please add it back
Looking through the code, the patch was failing to comment that snippet out
because it's no longer present.
I checked. The 'timeout *= 2' part is still there.
- Did you test whether pppd still properly survives errors during pppoe
initialization (e.g. when receiving broken data from the AC)?
- Felix
I only have access to PPPoA and Bridged DSL functionality. I put out a request
for people to test the patch but didn't get any responses.
You could put in a test change that simulates an occasional connection
failure. I think this should be tested because an old patch that was
removed touched parts of that and I want to make sure that the update
does not cause a regression there.
- Felix
Can you point it out to me? It must have been buried in a mix with something
else...
I was talking about 350-survive_bad_pads_packets.patch. I believe
dropping the patch was the right thing to do, but I still want to make
sure that we don't introduce any regressions here.
- Felix
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
