On Thu, Jan 07, 2021 at 10:39:03AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 1/7/21 10:13 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jan 2021 17:48:56 +0100 Guillaume Nault wrote:
> >> On Fri, Dec 18, 2020 at 11:25:32PM +0100, Guillaume Nault wrote:
> >>> The json output of the TCA_FLOWER_KEY_MPLS_OPTS attribute was invalid.
> >>>
> >>> Example:
> >>>
> >>> $ tc filter add dev eth0 ingress protocol mpls_uc flower mpls \
> >>> lse depth 1 label 100 \
> >>> lse depth 2 label 200
> >>>
> >>> $ tc -json filter show dev eth0 ingress
> >>> ...{"eth_type":"8847",
> >>> " mpls":[" lse":["depth":1,"label":100],
> >>> " lse":["depth":2,"label":200]]}...
> >>
> >> Is there any problem with this patch?
> >> It's archived in patchwork, but still in state "new". Therefore I guess
> >> it was dropped before being considered for review.
> >
> > Erm, that's weird. I think Alexei mentioned that auto-archiving is
> > turned on in the new netdevbpf patchwork instance. My guess is it got
> > auto archived :S
> >
> > Here is the list of all patches that are Archived as New:
> >
> > https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?state=1&archive=true
> >
> > Should any of these have been reviewed?
> >
>
>
> Interesting. I thought some patches had magically disappeared - and some
> of those are in that list.
Okay, but, in the end, should I repost this patch?
