netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [6/6]: jenkins hash for neigh
From: Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 11:29:33 +0200
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20040925090933.GU3236@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20040923225158.23c2d502.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924085234.GE3236@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040924142702.62a2b23d.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925064406.GL3236@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925005623.2faf8faf.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20040925090933.GU3236@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.6+20040818i
On Sat, Sep 25, 2004 at 11:09:33AM +0200, Harald Welte wrote:

> Please note that I guess I won't have any results until late Sunday/Monday.

Ok, there you go.  I've tested a kernel with your 6-patch-set for
cleanup/jenkins/..., and the four patch set, including

> > 4) The controversial/RFC patch, dorking with neigh_forced_gc()

It performed perfectly, I wasn't able to reproduce those overflows
anymore (testing with two /16 networks and about 200kpps incoming
packets to unresolved and non-existant neighbours)

> I'll do tests with and without INCOMPLETE check. No results until late
> Sunday/Monday, as indicated above.

I didn't even bother doing the INCOMPLETE check since Yoshifuji
indicated that this caused problems with IPv6.... and it already works
for me while the INCOMPLETE check is still in place.  If you still want
me to run it, I'll give it a go.

Please also note my next mail, where I'll publish some neighbour cache
statistics similar to rt_cache_stat

-- 
- Harald Welte <laforge@xxxxxxxxxxxx>               http://www.gnumonks.org/
============================================================================
Programming is like sex: One mistake and you have to support it your lifetime

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>