From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv6: shouldn't dump the expired routes Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:48:19 -0800 Message-ID: <20131226094819.613cee5b@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> References: <52BBC5F9.4050904@cn.fujitsu.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Duan Jiong Return-path: Received: from mail-pa0-f50.google.com ([209.85.220.50]:48065 "EHLO mail-pa0-f50.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753137Ab3LZRsX (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 Dec 2013 12:48:23 -0500 Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id kp14so6629011pab.9 for ; Thu, 26 Dec 2013 09:48:23 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52BBC5F9.4050904@cn.fujitsu.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 26 Dec 2013 14:00:25 +0800 Duan Jiong wrote: > > If we execute the command "ip -6 route show table all", those routes > that have been expired will be dumped. But as everyone knows, those > expired routes will not be used, and they will be deleted by the kernel. > So why we still need to dump they, and just don't dump them. > > Signed-off-by: Duan Jiong I can see three issues with this patch. 1. You are changing output of iproute2, and there is a slim chance somebody is expecting those routes in some test script. 2. Developers maybe using this to check that the expiration of routes is really working. 3. By making rt6_check_expired a global symbol, it can't be optimized as well in a potentially hot path for routing. I am not saying the patch shouldn't go in, just raising the possibility that such a seemingly trivial change could cause other impacts.