On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 13:43 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>> Hi Eric,
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> >
>> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Hi Eric,
>> > >
>> > > I just wante
On Wed, 2017-12-13 at 13:43 -0800, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Eric,
> > >
> > > I just wanted to check if this is solved already, as I don't want to keep
Hi Eric,
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 7:11 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> >
> > Hi Eric,
> >
> > I just wanted to check if this is solved already, as I don't want to keep an
> > unnecessary revert patch in our internal branches.
> > According to my
On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> I just wanted to check if this is solved already, as I don't want to keep an
> unnecessary revert patch in our internal branches.
> According to my check bug still exists.
>
I will handle this today, thanks for the reminder.
On 26/09/2017 6:30 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
wrote:
It is in Greg's tree where all kobject patches should go through as far as I
know.
Yes, I will fix this, adding a second memmove()
Hi Eric,
I just wanted to check if this is solved alread
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:22 AM, Dmitry Torokhov
wrote:
> It is in Greg's tree where all kobject patches should go through as far as I
> know.
Yes, I will fix this, adding a second memmove()
On 26/09/2017 6:13 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
On 26/09/2017 3:51 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Hi Eric,
We see a regression introduced in this series, specifically in the
patches
touching li
On September 26, 2017 8:13:21 AM PDT, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Tariq Toukan
>wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 26/09/2017 3:51 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Tariq Toukan
>wrote:
Hi Eric,
We see a regression introduced in t
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 8:04 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
>
> On 26/09/2017 3:51 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Eric,
>>>
>>> We see a regression introduced in this series, specifically in the
>>> patches
>>> touching lib/kobject_uev
On 26/09/2017 3:51 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
Hi Eric,
We see a regression introduced in this series, specifically in the patches
touching lib/kobject_uevent.c.
We tried to figure out what is wrong there, but couldn't point it out.
Bug is t
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 4:21 AM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
>
>
> Hi Eric,
>
> We see a regression introduced in this series, specifically in the patches
> touching lib/kobject_uevent.c.
> We tried to figure out what is wrong there, but couldn't point it out.
>
> Bug is that mlx4 driver restart fails, be
On 20/09/2017 2:27 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
When rate of netns creation/deletion is high enough,
we observe softlockups in cleanup_net() caused by huge list
of netns and way too many rcu_barrier() calls.
This patch series does some optimizations in kobject,
and add batching to tunnels so that ne
From: Eric Dumazet
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 16:27:02 -0700
> When rate of netns creation/deletion is high enough,
> we observe softlockups in cleanup_net() caused by huge list
> of netns and way too many rcu_barrier() calls.
>
> This patch series does some optimizations in kobject,
> and add batch
When rate of netns creation/deletion is high enough,
we observe softlockups in cleanup_net() caused by huge list
of netns and way too many rcu_barrier() calls.
This patch series does some optimizations in kobject,
and add batching to tunnels so that netns dismantles are
less costly.
IPv6 addrlabe
14 matches
Mail list logo
