From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3 XFRM]: Fix invalid key for lookup of cached bundles Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2005 03:30:26 +0100 Message-ID: <422BBCC2.4010706@trash.net> References: <422AF8D0.3010905@trash.net> <20050307012458.GA4335@gondor.apana.org.au> <422BB14A.5030302@trash.net> <20050307014337.GA4451@gondor.apana.org.au> <422BB477.3040607@trash.net> <20050307015943.GA4533@gondor.apana.org.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@oss.sgi.com To: Herbert Xu In-Reply-To: <20050307015943.GA4533@gondor.apana.org.au> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Herbert Xu wrote: > How about we fix the bundle problem first, and then add the fwmark/tos > stuff? I think fixing the bundle list scalability is probably more > important than having working TOS/fwmark at this point in time. I agree that it is more important, but I don't see any harm in fixing the other problem for transport mode first. Fixing the scalability problem requires a dynamically resized hash, anything static will lead to different scalability problems with a large number of policies. The tos/fwmark part looks comparatively small, simply reroute all packets based on src/dst/fwmark/predicted final tos if they differ. But since both of this is not done yet, I think it would be better to fix the smaller problem first. Regards Patrick