<Grommish>
PaulFertser: I'll let you know :) I've been staring at this for far to long.. and each time it runs, it takes 2 hours before i know if it fails :D
black_ant has joined #openwrt-devel
black_ant has joined #openwrt-devel
gch981213961 has joined #openwrt-devel
gch98121396 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gch981213961 is now known as gch98121396
nitroshift has joined #openwrt-devel
Borromini has joined #openwrt-devel
nitroshift has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
aszeszo has joined #openwrt-devel
Ycarus has joined #openwrt-devel
gch981213968 has joined #openwrt-devel
gch98121396 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<ynezz>
if I put two different devices into lan9 lan10 ports and start ping between them it works
<ynezz>
then I remove one device from lan9 port (vlan 140) and ping stops as expected
<ynezz>
so I connect the device into port lan17 (vlan 150) and the ping starts working again for some time, then stops, which is quite unexpected
<ynezz>
actually I don't need to use vlans (IIUC DSA correctly), but it behaves the same with or without vlans
<ynezz>
I'm just looking for some solution for my testbed, where I've two testing devices 1. apu2 2. cdrouter and multiple DUTs (devices under test)
Rene__ has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
DUTs are Netgear RAX40 (rax40), TP-Link Archer C7v6 (archer-c7v6) for example
<ynezz>
I want to control the network in the testbed from CI runner, probably via some API (rpcd or such) or for the start just over SSH
<ynezz>
so I can connect testing equipment like apu2 with the DUT, usually it's WAN, LAN1 and LAN2 from the DUT connected to the testing equipment
<ynezz>
in ideal scenario I would like to be able to run multiple CI jobs in paralel, so this would mean, that testing equipment(TE) 1 is connected to DUT 1, TE2 to DUT2 etc.
<ynezz>
the dependencies would be handled on the CI side, so no need to worry about the reservations/clashing of the network configs
<ynezz>
so in essence, something like `ssh root@testbed setup_network te1 dut1` (and it would connect the te1 with dut1 over various switch ports to interconnect WAN,LAN1,LAN2 properly)
<ynezz>
I'm not networking guy, don't want to reinvent the wheel, so wondering if there is something already available for such stuff, ideally packaged for OpenWrt
<Rene__>
Someone looked at Netgear GC110 cloud switches? I see that you can get them really cheap. € 30,-- for 10 port switch 8x port ethernet and 2x SFP ports.
<Rene__>
I don't think GC110 GS110 are the same. The datasheet talks about an 400MHz Cortex-A9 ARM instead of a MIPS cpu.
<ynezz>
ah, sorry then, C/S
dedeckeh has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
woshty has joined #openwrt-devel
feriman has quit [Ping timeout: 256 seconds]
<Rene__>
ynezz: No problem. Thanks for the info. I wonder what kind of firmware format they are using. Firmware image has the stk extention but I can't find any other info on the web or any GPL sources.
<svanheule[m]>
Rene__: the stk FW files are for Broadcom platforms
<svanheule[m]>
and the GC110 is definitely Broadcom
dedeckeh has joined #openwrt-devel
<Rene__>
svanheule[m]: thanks
<svanheule[m]>
Looking for anything specific?
<Rene__>
No, I saw that they are really cheap for a switch with SFP ports. Also POE version is € 50,-.
<svanheule[m]>
I think you have to buy an Insight subscription after a year to keep using these switches, maybe that's why the retail prices are lower than for other switches
<Rene__>
But I was wondering if the switch was opensource or at least see that GPL code was available. But that is not the case.
<svanheule[m]>
correction: XGS1930 is GbE + SFP+, XS1930 is N-BaseT + SFP+
fonix232 has joined #openwrt-devel
gch98121396 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gch98121396 has joined #openwrt-devel
goliath has joined #openwrt-devel
fonix232 has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
eduardas has quit [Excess Flood]
eduardas has joined #openwrt-devel
fonix232 has joined #openwrt-devel
Net147_ has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
Slimey has joined #openwrt-devel
valku has joined #openwrt-devel
Borromini has quit [Ping timeout: 272 seconds]
user- has quit [Quit: quit]
user- has joined #openwrt-devel
Net147 has joined #openwrt-devel
user- has quit [Quit: quit]
user- has joined #openwrt-devel
Borromini has joined #openwrt-devel
eduardas has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
muhaha has quit [Quit: Connection closed]
danitool has quit [Quit: Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos]
<adrianschmutzler>
ynezz: ping
<ynezz>
adrianschmutzler: timeout
<ynezz>
:)
linzst has quit [Quit: Leaving]
<ynezz>
hi, btw
<adrianschmutzler>
I just put together a patch to create a separate Mi Router 4a Gigabit, maybe it would be easier if I took over the corresponding uboot-envtools patch and added the 4a there on top of my current tree?
<adrianschmutzler>
And you just drop it ...
<ynezz>
adrianschmutzler: sure, thanks
<adrianschmutzler>
okay, perfect.
<ynezz>
next time just do it directly on GH, assign it to yourself
<ynezz>
I've script which is merging just PRs assigned to me and marked as `ready for merge`
<adrianschmutzler>
I decided to pick up the 4a subject relatively late and when I remembered the connection to "your" PR, you already picked it ...
<ynezz>
ah, ok
<adrianschmutzler>
I found that it's easier to split the device myself (in contrast to explaining how the DTSI split should be done), and then the guy in the other PR can apply whatever changes he has on top ...
<ynezz>
done
<ynezz>
BTW thanks for the corrections
n4gi0s has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
<ynezz>
if I see PR in a good state without `changes needed` or other stuff, I consider it ready
<ynezz>
and not going over those hundreds of comments again
<ynezz>
if it compiles, ship it :)
<adrianschmutzler>
I actually think it's quite hard to find a good policy for using "needs changes"
<ynezz>
for me its opposite for `ready for merge`
opal has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
<adrianschmutzler>
I typically hesitate to use it after first review if the commit generally seems okay, i.e. the guy seems to know what he's doing
<adrianschmutzler>
although there might be minor flaws that need to be corrected
<ynezz>
with 200 commits its quite hard to filter those
<adrianschmutzler>
since I've observed that a "needs changes" applied once is rarely lifted later
<adrianschmutzler>
particularly if the PR becomes old
<ynezz>
I'm going over those in other batches
<ynezz>
it would be nice to come with some automatic cleanup as discussed previously many times
<ynezz>
maybe it would be a good topic for next meeting
<adrianschmutzler>
yes, though this would probably help for many things but not "needs changes"
<ynezz>
if there is no comment/commit after `needs changes`?
opal has joined #openwrt-devel
Tapper has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
then it's stale
<ynezz>
stale -> closed
<ynezz>
or?
<adrianschmutzler>
okay, yes. that of course. That's just somehow different to the issue we discussed.
<ynezz>
do you've some example?
<adrianschmutzler>
I rather see the problem of "needs changes" where there is some activity of the author but it's just forgotten because the commit became old
<adrianschmutzler>
since there are not many people looking at these
<ynezz>
because there is a lot of useless noise, like people think its forum
<adrianschmutzler>
which essentially was only my point for not putting a "needs changes" in the first place for minor flaws
<ynezz>
but then I jump in that PR and find it's not ready
<adrianschmutzler>
essentially, that's a point where we would need to define a policy for when these labels should be used
<adrianschmutzler>
which we will have to do anyway when we use more automation
<ynezz>
to me `needs changes` means it's not ready for merge
<ynezz>
I don't want to have `needs slight changes` :)
<adrianschmutzler>
so, from your point of view, the first committer looking at the PR should use that unless he thinks it's ready for merge
<ynezz>
or `needs reviewer` if not able to decide
<adrianschmutzler>
I will have to think a little how this matches my review patterns; since I frequently only do partial reviews only
<ynezz>
is it possible to filter by number of comments?
<adrianschmutzler>
no idea
n4gi0s has joined #openwrt-devel
n4gi0s has quit [Client Quit]
<adrianschmutzler>
But I do not have a problem with using "needs changes" according to your concept if that's helping you to spend less time
<ynezz>
I'm now doing it manually, but I hope, that some day it's going to be automatic
<ynezz>
like the formal stuff checking etc.
<ynezz>
what would you suggest instead?
finsternis has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
<adrianschmutzler>
no, I'm fine with that
<adrianschmutzler>
my point was more about the immediate future
<ynezz>
don't even add the label if it's not ready for review?
<ynezz>
so there would be PRs without any label, unless touched for the first time?
decke has quit [Quit: Leaving.]
<adrianschmutzler>
My idea of "needs changes" was more like it implied substantial changes
<ynezz>
that's same for patchwork
<adrianschmutzler>
And I think it was actually used like that in the past (or some people just didn't use it at all)
<adrianschmutzler>
And if other people think like that, the label will increase the chance of a PR being buried
<ynezz>
with patchwork, you either do all the small changes yourself or ask the author with "changes requested"
<ynezz>
there is nothing in between
<ynezz>
with github we miss the v2 from email
<ynezz>
but this could be automated, like if there was some activity after this label, we can remove that label
<ynezz>
or such
<adrianschmutzler>
Well, patchwork is somewhat a different szenario
<ynezz>
`needs changes` -> pushed in the PR branch -> `needs changes` removed
<adrianschmutzler>
hmm
<ynezz>
or the comment from author could remove that `needs changes`
n4gi0s has joined #openwrt-devel
<adrianschmutzler>
So, essentially apply the patchwork concept onto GitHub
<ynezz>
if the `needs changes` label passes certain period of time, mark it as `stale` then close
<adrianschmutzler>
new submission -> new evaluation
<ynezz>
GH is slightly easier as you can see the diff to previous
n4gi0s has quit [Client Quit]
n4gi0s has joined #openwrt-devel
<adrianschmutzler>
This could work, at least it would be better than the current scheme where everybody uses "needs changes" differently
<adrianschmutzler>
automation should be limited to comments by the author though
n4gi0s has quit [Client Quit]
n4gi0s has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
yeah
N4gi0s_ has joined #openwrt-devel
<adrianschmutzler>
what should I do with PRs where I have reviewed 50%, but cannot review the other 50? "needs reviewer"?
<rr123>
so, as long as I chose a package as built-in, its InstallDev will always be included into SDK/Toolchain correct? I included libnetfilter-queue under menuconfig, and can find libnetfilter under build/target, but they did not show up in SDK, i.e. the InstallDev from its Makefile did not help, am I missing something
<jow>
rr123: the produced SDK will always be lean, it will not contain any package ressources, just the toolchain
<ynezz>
f00b4r0: merged
<f00b4r0>
ynezz: thx! :)
<ynezz>
with so many tested-by: it's quite a pleasure
<ynezz>
I plan to look at patchwork in the upcoming days
<adrianschmutzler>
maybe I should predict more often that something won't happen :-)
<ynezz>
what do you mean?
<rr123>
jow: thanks, what's the point of InstallDev then? in my case, libnetfiter's InstallDev did not do anything to SDK/Toolchain
<adrianschmutzler>
ynezz: just because I said probably only lynxis or koen will merge that
<ynezz>
ah, no worries about that
<rr123>
I need libnetfilter-queue.so to build, trying to make code a package now, was trying to build within sdk but then found SDK does not have the InstallDev stuff
<adrianschmutzler>
maybe the 4k sector patch also gets merged if I tell now that it probably won't ;-)
<ynezz>
I'm about to push
<f00b4r0>
adrianschmutzler: lol :)
woshty has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
<jow>
rr123: the point of InstallDev is to stage header files and libaries in the staging directory so that other packages can pick them up
<rr123>
in that case I might just set gcc to staging directory directly instead of using SDK/Toolchain then, will try now
<adrianschmutzler>
is option macaddr broken for wifi-device in 19.07 or am I just to stupid to use it?
rsalvaterra has joined #openwrt-devel
<ynezz>
remote: No matching SoB line found for author Roman Kuzmitskii <damex.pp@icloud.com>, gah
<rsalvaterra>
Heads up: something in the last commits broke my VLAN setup.
<adrianschmutzler>
ynezz: it would be worth introducing CI just for this single issue
gch9812139691 has joined #openwrt-devel
<rsalvaterra>
I don't know if only switchdev devices are affected, haven't tested DSA.
<rsalvaterra>
But my Archer C6 was definitely affected.
gch981213969 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gch9812139691 is now known as gch981213969
<rsalvaterra>
I'm almost sure the cause is somewhere in the last netifd update.
Redfoxmoon has quit [Quit: ZNC 1.6.6+deb1ubuntu0.2 - http://znc.in]
<adrianschmutzler>
rsalvaterra: the changelog at least sonds like it
woshty has joined #openwrt-devel
<rsalvaterra>
adrianschmutzler: I don't know what happened. VLAN 1 (eth0.1, the LAN side) was configured correctly. VLAN 2 (eth0.2, the WAN) wasn't.
aszeszo has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Redfoxmoon has joined #openwrt-devel
<rsalvaterra>
I'm going to revert the netifd update and see this fixes it…
<rsalvaterra>
So, would someone with commit access please unfsck master?
gch981213969 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gch981213969 has joined #openwrt-devel
CrazyLemon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
CrazyLemon has joined #openwrt-devel
gch9812139693 has joined #openwrt-devel
gch981213969 has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
gch9812139693 is now known as gch981213969
feriman has joined #openwrt-devel
voxadam has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
dedeckeh has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
voxadam has joined #openwrt-devel
<aparcar[m]>
lynxis: that hat looks good on you
<aparcar[m]>
rsalvaterra: thanks for the sstrip patch, I'll give it a try later today. Are there any notable changes from our intree version?
<rsalvaterra>
aparcar[m]: 'morning! ;)
<rsalvaterra>
Zero changes, that I have noticed. And that's good!
<rsalvaterra>
Tested on two MIPS devices.
<rsalvaterra>
I'm doing my builds with sstrip -z. I haven't noticed any size differences, but I was only paying attention to the size of the final image, which is padded.
valku has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
blocktrron has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
blocktrron has joined #openwrt-devel
Redfoxmoon has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
Redfoxmoon has joined #openwrt-devel
Redfoxmoon has joined #openwrt-devel
Redfoxmoon has quit [Changing host]
dedeckeh has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
black_ant has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
ivanich has quit [Quit: Konversation terminated!]
matteoelimo has quit [Ping timeout: 260 seconds]
matteoelimo has joined #openwrt-devel
pstef has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
pstef has joined #openwrt-devel
<aparcar[m]>
rsalvaterra: pong.
<rsalvaterra>
I just noticed the old sstrip version removed trailing zero bytes by default, while the current version 3.1a doesn't. We should probably add the -z argument by default.
<rsalvaterra>
I can do this as a follow-up patch, if you prefer.