[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <82a99a95-9a8c-48e8-133a-f249b5a25f3b@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2020 19:36:49 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next] neigh: support smaller retrans_time settting
On 3/31/20 7:07 PM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> Currently, we limited the retrans_time to be greater than HZ/2. i.e.
> setting retrans_time less than 500ms will not work. This makes the user
> unable to achieve a more accurate control for bonding arp fast failover.
>
> Update the sanity check to HZ/100, which is 10ms, to let users have more
> ability on the retrans_time control.
>
> v2: use HZ instead of hard code number
>
> Signed-off-by: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
> ---
> net/core/neighbour.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/neighbour.c b/net/core/neighbour.c
> index 5bf8d22a47ec..46a5611a9f3d 100644
> --- a/net/core/neighbour.c
> +++ b/net/core/neighbour.c
> @@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ int __neigh_event_send(struct neighbour *neigh, struct sk_buff *skb)
> neigh->nud_state = NUD_INCOMPLETE;
> neigh->updated = now;
> next = now + max(NEIGH_VAR(neigh->parms, RETRANS_TIME),
> - HZ/2);
> + HZ/100);
> neigh_add_timer(neigh, next);
> immediate_probe = true;
> } else {
>
Note that IPv6 has a different limit (HZ/10)
It would be nice to have converged values.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists