From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: implement rt_genid_bump_ipv6 with fn_sernum and remove rt6i_genid Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 13:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20140910.130929.247064282043941043.davem@davemloft.net> References: <1410267519.27979.31.camel@localhost> <130f98f49b1b90a30908bfda8f01109c91edfe1c.1410341451.git.hannes@stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com To: hannes@stressinduktion.org Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:43059 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752787AbaIJUJa (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Sep 2014 16:09:30 -0400 In-Reply-To: <130f98f49b1b90a30908bfda8f01109c91edfe1c.1410341451.git.hannes@stressinduktion.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 11:31:28 +0200 > In case we need to force the sockets to relookup the routes we now > increase the fn_sernum on all fibnodes in the routing tree. This is a > costly operation but should only happen if we have major routing/policy > changes in the kernel (e.g. manual route adding/removal, xfrm policy > changes). Core routers can update thousands of route updates per second, and they do this via what you refer to as "manual route adding/removal". I don't think we want to put such a scalability problem into the tree. There has to be a lightweight way to address this.