From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/5] sctp: add the rhashtable apis for sctp global transport hashtable Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:31:25 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <20160111.163125.1974780181651011339.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20160111093012.GA23525@gondor.apana.org.au> <20160111160039.GA6061@mrl.redhat.com> <5693E451.2000306@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: mleitner@redhat.com, herbert@gondor.apana.org.au, lucien.xin@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-sctp@vger.kernel.org, vyasevic@redhat.com, daniel@iogearbox.net To: vyasevich@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:41233 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759403AbcAKVb1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Jan 2016 16:31:27 -0500 In-Reply-To: <5693E451.2000306@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Vlad Yasevich Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2016 12:20:17 -0500 > I have a hard time excepting this argument. Just because a given test > scenario may be unreasonable now, doesn't make so in the future. If > there is a way to solve the problem, then it should be done. Saying > this isn't really a problem isn't going to make it go away. +1