From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Bligh Subject: Re: Scalability of interface creation and deletion Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 09:08:30 +0100 Message-ID: <4C6EBDC32B7CEC8768A223C5@nimrod.local> References: <891B02256A0667292521A4BF@Ximines.local> <1304770926.2821.1157.camel@edumazet-laptop> <0F4A638C2A523577CDBC295E@Ximines.local> <1304783684.9216.2.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4DC571F1.2020108@candelatech.com> <1304786277.3207.12.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4DC57702.4090606@candelatech.com> <1304787065.3207.17.camel@edumazet-laptop> <4DC611C3.7070607@candelatech.com> Reply-To: Alex Bligh Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alex Bligh To: Ben Greear , Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail.avalus.com ([89.16.176.221]:36426 "EHLO mail.avalus.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751361Ab1EHIIb (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 May 2011 04:08:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <4DC611C3.7070607@candelatech.com> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --On 7 May 2011 20:45:07 -0700 Ben Greear wrote: > Well, I'd hope to get a netlink message about the device being deleted, > and > after that, be able to create another one with the same name, etc. > > Whether the memory is actually freed in the kernel or not wouldn't matter > to me... Provided the former para is always done, I can't actually think of a case where the caller would /ever/ care about the latter (save perhaps a final shutdown of the whole net subsystem). -- Alex Bligh