On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 1:44 AM, Julian Anastasov <j...@ssi.bg> wrote: > I think, your patch from January is almost > good:
I'll rebase it, add your other suggestions, test it, and send it in. > And the patch from Eric for IPVS looks good too. Are we sure that we want to change the semantics of set_owner_w to orphan it? It works for us but that's not the behavior I'd expect from that function and might burn someone later? I've actually been looking through the code more for other uses of set_owner_w and I noticed this weird quirk: The test was simple: 0) Enable ip_forward 1) Add an address to loopback and listen on it 2) Accept a connection and close it (creating a TIME-WAIT socket) 3) Add a new route to a gre tunnel If early demux was enabled, we'd use the route from the socket If early demux was disabled, we'd forward using the gre tunnel Should we just replicate this behavior in ipvs? if (!skb->dev && skb->sk) return NF_ACCEPT; -- Alex Gartrell <agartr...@fb.com> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
