[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQLy-A0D9OJYOpmtrFXqv7m6BTmrjXG4S=7BXTgBXq4z4w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2019 10:53:00 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 0/7] ipv4 ipv6: Move location of pcpu route
cache and exceptions
On Sun, Apr 28, 2019 at 8:10 AM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 4/27/19 7:27 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> > From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
> >
> > This series moves IPv4 pcpu cached routes from fib_nh to fib_nh_common
> > to make the caches avaialable for IPv6 nexthops (fib6_nh) with IPv4
> > routes. This allows a fib6_nh struct to be used with both IPv4 and
> > and IPv6 routes.
> >
> > In addition pcpu caches and exception entries for IPv6 routes are
> > moved from fib6_info to fib6_nh since they are really a function of
> > the device and gateway. During the move of each, functions are
> > refactored such that the core logic is in new helpers that take
> > a fib6_nh versus a fib6_info.
> >
>
> I would prefer we fix the existing bugs before moving the code around,
> otherwise stable teams work is going to be tough.
>
> We have dozens of syzbot reports involving all this stuff.
+1
Adding tests as we go along would immensely help too.
Unfortunately afaik there is no test infra to use for it.
Anyone has ideas?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists