In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:09:44 -0800 (PST)),
"David S. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:32:13 +0900 (JST)
>
> > BTW, David, would you mind sending your addrconf patches to me?
> > I'd like to
From: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:32:13 +0900 (JST)
> BTW, David, would you mind sending your addrconf patches to me?
> I'd like to look into it deeply.
> I used to have clone, but I happened to remove that tree...
I intended to review my patches in small piece
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Fri, 3 Feb 2006 12:48:49 +1100), Herbert Xu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:31:58AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@
> wrote:
> >
> > We SHALL do autoconf when we "up" an ipv6-capable device.
> > It is the IPv6.
>
> I don't think
On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 10:31:58AM +0900, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / ?$B5HF#1QL@ wrote:
>
> We SHALL do autoconf when we "up" an ipv6-capable device.
> It is the IPv6.
I don't think the word "SHALL" stops us from implementing it in
user-space...
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Em
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Thu, 2 Feb 2006 23:42:25 +1100), Herbert Xu
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 05:37:22AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
> >
> > > Yes you are right. The locking/refcounting in addrconf.c is such
> > > a mess. I've asked a number of times bef
From: Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 22:25:54 +1100
> [IPV6]: Don't hold extra ref count in ipv6_ifa_notify
>
> Currently the logic in ipv6_ifa_notify is to hold an extra reference
> count for addrconf dst's that get added to the routing table. Thus,
> when addrconf dst ent
On Thu, Feb 02, 2006 at 05:37:22AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> > Yes you are right. The locking/refcounting in addrconf.c is such
> > a mess. I've asked a number of times before as to why most of
> > this can't be done in user-space instead. There is nothing performance
> > critical here
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 01:00:49AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> However I do know I have correctly found the leak.
>
> Yes you are right. The locking/refcounting in addrconf.c is such
> a mess. I've asked a number of times before as to why most
On Fri, Jan 27, 2006 at 01:00:49AM -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> However I do know I have correctly found the leak.
Yes you are right. The locking/refcounting in addrconf.c is such
a mess. I've asked a number of times before as to why most of
this can't be done in user-space instead. The
Herbert Xu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 08:12:02PM +, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>>
>> Unfortunately because we have already call rt6_ifdown() the route is
>> not found in the routing table, the dst_free does not decrement the
>> count and is therefore unable to free the
On Wed, Jan 25, 2006 at 08:12:02PM +, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
> Unfortunately because we have already call rt6_ifdown() the route is
> not found in the routing table, the dst_free does not decrement the
> count and is therefore unable to free the dst entry because the count
> is still elevat
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Wed, 25 Jan 2006 13:12:02 -0700), [EMAIL
PROTECTED] (Eric W. Biederman) says:
> By bringing down the routes before we bring down the addresses we leak
> the dst cache entries held by the addresses.
:
> Fix this by simply moving rt6_ifdown where we flush the rout
By bringing down the routes before we bring down the addresses we leak
the dst cache entries held by the addresses.
For address on an interface there is an associated input route. When
we bring that address down we call ipv6_ifa_notify(RTM_DELADDR, ifa).
ipv6_ifa_notify will then call ip6_del_r
13 matches
Mail list logo
