From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@idosch.org>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
roopa@cumulusnetworks.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com,
mlxsw@mellanox.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 13/19] ipv6: Flush all sibling routes upon NETDEV_UNREGISTER
Date: Wed, 3 Jan 2018 09:50:57 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180103075057.GC761@splinter> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <f039daf9-fe6f-0a9a-e04c-2b272ce4f035@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 02, 2018 at 10:42:51AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 12/31/17 9:15 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> > IPv4 and IPv6 react differently to a netdev being unregistered. In IPv4,
> > in case the netdev is used as a nexthop device in a multipath route, the
> > entire route is flushed.
> >
> > However, IPv6 only removes the nexthops associated with the unregistered
> > netdev.
> >
> > Align IPv4 and IPv6 and flush all the sibling routes when a nexthop
> > device is unregistered.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Ido Schimmel <idosch@mellanox.com>
> > ---
> > net/ipv6/route.c | 44 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 39 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> not so sure about this one.
Yea, I wasn't sure about it either. I'll drop it and fix the tests
accordingly.
> When we get to nexthops as separate objects, we can bring in consistency
> by allowing ipv4 routes to just drop a single nexthop in the route
> versus the behavior today.
Agreed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-01-03 7:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-31 16:14 [RFC PATCH net-next 00/19] ipv6: Align nexthop behaviour with IPv4 Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 01/19] ipv6: Remove redundant route flushing during namespace dismantle Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 02/19] ipv6: Mark dead nexthops with appropriate flags Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 03/19] ipv6: Clear nexthop flags upon netdev up Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 16:20 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:44 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 15:32 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 16:43 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 16:56 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 17:40 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 18:47 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 20:53 ` Ido Schimmel
2018-01-03 23:08 ` David Ahern
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 04/19] ipv6: Prepare to handle multiple netdev events Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 16:29 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:46 ` Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:14 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 05/19] ipv6: Set nexthop flags upon carrier change Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 06/19] ipv6: Set nexthop flags during route creation Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 07/19] ipv6: Check nexthop flags during route lookup instead of carrier Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 08/19] ipv6: Check nexthop flags in route dump " Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 09/19] ipv6: Ignore dead routes during lookup Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 10/19] ipv6: Report dead flag during route dump Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 11/19] ipv6: Add explicit flush indication to routes Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 12/19] ipv6: Teach tree walker to skip multipath routes Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 13/19] ipv6: Flush all sibling routes upon NETDEV_UNREGISTER Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 17:42 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:50 ` Ido Schimmel [this message]
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 14/19] ipv6: Export sernum update function Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 15/19] ipv6: Take table lock outside of " Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 16/19] ipv6: Flush multipath routes when all siblings are dead Ido Schimmel
2018-01-02 17:38 ` David Ahern
2018-01-03 7:54 ` Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 17/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for IPv4/IPv6 FIB Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 18/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for netdev down Ido Schimmel
2017-12-31 16:15 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 19/19] selftests: fib_tests: Add test cases for netdev carrier change Ido Schimmel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180103075057.GC761@splinter \
--to=idosch@idosch.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=idosch@mellanox.com \
--cc=mlxsw@mellanox.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com \
--cc=roopa@cumulusnetworks.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.