In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Fri, 26 May 2006 02:24:19 +0300 (EEST)), Meelis Roos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
> > (To YOSHIFUJI Hideaki: this is about the > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/35262 thread) > > Tracked it down to IPV6 merge at 2006-03-21: > commit cd85f6e2f58282186ad720fc18482be228f0b972 is good (right before > the bunch of patches) > commit b00055aacdb172c05067612278ba27265fcd05ce is bad (right after the > bunch of changes) I guess rt6_select() is returning &ip6_null_entry and the caller is finding next best route; e.g. default route. Does this solve your problem? diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c index 0190e39..93eb33c 100644 --- a/net/ipv6/route.c +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c @@ -280,10 +280,12 @@ static int inline rt6_check_neigh(struct { struct neighbour *neigh = rt->rt6i_nexthop; int m = 0; - if (neigh) { + if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_NONEXTHOP) + m = 1; + else if (neigh) { read_lock_bh(&neigh->lock); if (neigh->nud_state & NUD_VALID) - m = 1; + m = 2; read_unlock_bh(&neigh->lock); } return m; @@ -292,15 +294,18 @@ static int inline rt6_check_neigh(struct static int rt6_score_route(struct rt6_info *rt, int oif, int strict) { - int m = rt6_check_dev(rt, oif); + int m, n + + m = rt6_check_dev(rt, oif); if (!m && (strict & RT6_SELECT_F_IFACE)) return -1; #ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF m |= IPV6_DECODE_PREF(IPV6_EXTRACT_PREF(rt->rt6i_flags)) << 2; #endif - if (rt6_check_neigh(rt)) + n = rt6_check_neigh(rt); + if (n > 1) m |= 16; - else if (strict & RT6_SELECT_F_REACHABLE) + else if (!n && strict & RT6_SELECT_F_REACHABLE) return -1; return m; } - 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
