From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dst: call cond_resched() in dst_gc_task()
Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:34:06 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <20100208.153406.123254133.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <1265639549.3048.33.camel@edumazet-laptop>
	<1265657560.4236.80.camel@edumazet-laptop>
	<20100208152606.91c55722.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: eric.dumazet@gmail.com, pstaszewski@itcare.pl,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: akpm@linux-foundation.org
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:59632
	"EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750780Ab0BHXdw (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 8 Feb 2010 18:33:52 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20100208152606.91c55722.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2010 15:26:06 -0800

> I assume that this function spends most of its time walking over busy
> entries?  Is a more powerful data structure needed?

When you're getting pounded with millions of packets per second,
all mostly to different destinations (and thus resolving to
different routing cache entries), this is what happens.

For a busy router, really, this is normal behavior.