From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: do not overwrite inetpeer metrics prematurely Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 09:34:26 +0100 Message-ID: <20140308083426.GC5493@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <20140306095054.EEC5EE6E04@unicorn.suse.cz> <20140306.142425.1675660751208500651.davem@davemloft.net> <20140306200658.GA32699@unicorn.suse.cz> <20140307.155258.463380957582451300.davem@davemloft.net> <20140307213842.GA17583@unicorn.suse.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, jmorris@namei.org, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, kaber@trash.net To: Michal Kubecek Return-path: Received: from order.stressinduktion.org ([87.106.68.36]:49759 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751222AbaCHIe2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 8 Mar 2014 03:34:28 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140307213842.GA17583@unicorn.suse.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Mar 07, 2014 at 10:38:42PM +0100, Michal Kubecek wrote: > Today I also realized another problem with current code: if we already > have inetpeer with metrics and use "ip route change" with metrics, e.g. > > ip route add fec0::1 dev eth0 rto_min 1000 > ip route change fec0::1 dev eth0 hoplimit 10 Hmm, those routes seem to not have RTF_NONEXTHOP (no gateway). I am a bit concerend that rt6_select returns !RTF_CACHE node and we do end up doing the inetpeer lookup on every lookup on them. Maybe you have already investigated? Thanks, Hannes