[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1407885074.3535486.152056309.7BDE2766@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2014 01:11:14 +0200
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, hannes@...hat.com
Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, mleitner@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH stable 3.4 1/2] ipv4: move route garbage collector to work
queue
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014, at 00:42, David Miller wrote:
> The second patch, on the other hand, needs some more thought. It is
> changing behavior, in that cases that would have succeeded in the past
> will now potentially fail only because the neighbour cache limits were
> hit at an unlucky moment (when an async GC was going already).
>
> If this happens from a software interrupt, we'll fail instantly
> because attempts starts at 0.
Hmhmhm, a truly valid concern.
> Just bite the bullet and put a spinlock around the GC operation.
We had a spinlock around the GC operation at first but still were
capable to cause softlockups, I don't remember if a complete lockup
happend.
> The async GCs are normal on a loaded machine, whereas the neighbour
> tables filling up is much less so. I think having the neighbout
> overflow path synchronize with async GCs is therefore not going to be
> a real problem in practice.
Thanks for your comments, we look into it. Should be no problem to
conditional synchronize with the neighbour overflow path.
Thanks,
Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists