[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180911034106.GB24677@leo.usersys.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 11:41:06 +0800
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>,
network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv6: use rt6_info members when dst is set in
rt6_fill_node
Hi David,
On Mon, Sep 10, 2018 at 08:39:34PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 9/10/18 7:04 PM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
>
> > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > index 18e00ce..62621b4 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > @@ -998,6 +998,21 @@ static void ip6_rt_copy_init(struct rt6_info *rt, struct fib6_info *ort)
> > rt->rt6i_prefsrc = ort->fib6_prefsrc;
> > }
> >
> > +static void rt6_update_info(struct rt6_info *rt)
> > +{
> > + struct fib6_info *from;
> > +
> > + rcu_read_lock();
> > + from = rcu_dereference(rt->from);
> > + fib6_info_hold(from);
> > + rcu_read_unlock();
> > +
> > + from->fib6_flags = rt->rt6i_flags;
> > + from->fib6_nh.nh_gw = rt->rt6i_gateway;
>
> As I mentioned on your last patch, redirects do *not* update fib
> entries. Exceptions, yes, but not core data of a fib entry.
Thanks for the comments, I understand that we should not update original route.
And here I know the redirect (should?) do not update fib entries.
So Xin Long's patch looks more reasonable.
Thanks
Hangbin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists