Re: [PATCH 2/9] get rid of unused revision element
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:35:55 -0800 > I will be glad to get this working. Is there any point in doing the a > small systems version as well? Not at this time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 2/9] get rid of unused revision element
On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 04:06:57 -0800 (PST) David Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Robert Olsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:44:32 +0100 > > > The idea was to have a selective flush of route cache entries when > > a fib insert/delete happened. From what I remember you added another/ > > better solution. Just a list with route cache entries pointing to parent > > route. So yes this was obsoleted by your/our effort to avoid total > > flushing of the route cache. Unfinished work. > > Yes, that's right. The synchronization was very hard. > > But there is another issue, see below > > > According to http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html > > (last in page) we currently flush the route cache 2.80 times per second. > > when using full Internet routing with Linux. Maybe we're forced to pick > > up this thread again someday. > > This proves we need to solve this problem. > > The reason I've never gone back to that work is that I didn't > want to do it while we still had multiple FIB data structure > implementations. > > Someone needs to go over whatever deficiencies exist in fib_trie > vs. fib_hash so that we can delete fib_hash and move over to using > fib_trie always. It makes no sense to implement everything > interfacing into that code twice. > > There was a full consensus that this was the way to move forward, > we just need the dirty work to be done. > > If someone wants to show their gratitude for my getting rid of > the multipath cached routing code, the above work would be a > great way to do so (hint hint) :-) I will be glad to get this working. Is there any point in doing the a small systems version as well? -- Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 2/9] get rid of unused revision element
From: Robert Olsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 12:44:32 +0100 > The idea was to have a selective flush of route cache entries when > a fib insert/delete happened. From what I remember you added another/ > better solution. Just a list with route cache entries pointing to parent > route. So yes this was obsoleted by your/our effort to avoid total > flushing of the route cache. Unfinished work. Yes, that's right. The synchronization was very hard. But there is another issue, see below > According to http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html > (last in page) we currently flush the route cache 2.80 times per second. > when using full Internet routing with Linux. Maybe we're forced to pick > up this thread again someday. This proves we need to solve this problem. The reason I've never gone back to that work is that I didn't want to do it while we still had multiple FIB data structure implementations. Someone needs to go over whatever deficiencies exist in fib_trie vs. fib_hash so that we can delete fib_hash and move over to using fib_trie always. It makes no sense to implement everything interfacing into that code twice. There was a full consensus that this was the way to move forward, we just need the dirty work to be done. If someone wants to show their gratitude for my getting rid of the multipath cached routing code, the above work would be a great way to do so (hint hint) :-) -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 2/9] get rid of unused revision element
David Miller writes: > > The revision element must of been part of an earlier design, > > because currently it is set but never used. > > > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > I suspect Robert wanted to play around with some generation > ID optimizations but never got around to it. The idea was to have a selective flush of route cache entries when a fib insert/delete happened. From what I remember you added another/ better solution. Just a list with route cache entries pointing to parent route. So yes this was obsoleted by your/our effort to avoid total flushing of the route cache. Unfinished work. According to http://bgpupdates.potaroo.net/instability/bgpupd.html (last in page) we currently flush the route cache 2.80 times per second. when using full Internet routing with Linux. Maybe we're forced to pick up this thread again someday. Cheers. --ro -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 2/9] get rid of unused revision element
From: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 22:45:15 -0800 > The revision element must of been part of an earlier design, > because currently it is set but never used. > > Signed-off-by: Stephen Hemminger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Applied. I suspect Robert wanted to play around with some generation ID optimizations but never got around to it. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
