[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170207.131134.567606043153504044.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 13:11:34 -0500 (EST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ja@....bg
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
nhorman@...driver.com, steffen.klassert@...unet.com,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, yuehaibing@...wei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 net-next 0/7] net: dst_confirm replacement
From: Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 2017 23:14:10 +0200
> This patchset addresses the problem of neighbour
> confirmation where received replies from one nexthop
> can cause confirmation of different nexthop when using
> the same dst. Thanks to YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
> for tracking the dst->pending_confirm problem.
This looks good enough to apply to net-next, so I have done
so. Thanks Julian!
> - I failed to understand the CXGB* code, I see dst_confirm()
> calls but I'm not sure dst_neigh_output() was called. For now
> I just removed the dst->pending_confirm flag and left all
> dst_confirm() calls there. Any better idea?
As I said, it is trying to confirm neighbours based upon traffic
occurring in the chips TCP offload stack. The 'cm' in "iwch_cm.c"
means "connection manager".
We can probably get to the neigh that will end up being used
since there should be a flow key somewhere that we can use to
determine the nexthop address for neigh lookup.
> - Now may be old function neigh_output() should be restored
> instead of dst_neigh_output?
Please elaborate.
Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists