From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/9] ipv6: fib6: socket dst_entry improvments and cleanups Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:46:43 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20140926.124643.202150841147181272.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20140926.002853.1097612772155886372.davem@davemloft.net> <1411718323.1731596.171980125.03C65719@webmail.messagingengine.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, hideaki@yoshifuji.org, vyasevich@gmail.com, nicolas.dichtel@6wind.com, kafai@fb.com To: hannes@stressinduktion.org Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:47582 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754703AbaIZQqp (ORCPT ); Fri, 26 Sep 2014 12:46:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1411718323.1731596.171980125.03C65719@webmail.messagingengine.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Hannes Frederic Sowa Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 09:58:43 +0200 > On Fri, Sep 26, 2014, at 06:28, David Miller wrote: >> From: Hannes Frederic Sowa >> Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 16:11:44 +0200 >> >> > Eric Dumazet noticed that rt6_nodes wich are neither RTF_NONEXTHOP nor >> > RTF_GATEWAY but DST_HOST ones cause major routing lookup churn because >> > their rt6_genid is never renewed, thus ip6_dst_check always considers >> > them outdated. This is a major problem, because these kind of routes >> > are normally used to in input handling. >> >> This series is a disappointment for me from the perspective of the >> fact that we have a regression in mainline and this is too complex >> of a set of changes for there. >> >> If we relookup the thing every TCP input packet, we might as well >> not do the input route caching in the socket. > > I can understand. > > Toss this series, I'll try to do better tomorrow and send changes for > net and submit net-next cleanups when your queue is a bit smaller. BTW, don't get me wrong, I like the new code and for 'net-next' it's good. But for 'net' we have to come up with something simpler meanwhile.