From: Robert Shearman <rshea...@brocade.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:05:18 +0000

> On 01/12/16 12:27, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>> It has been reported that update_suffix can be expensive when it is
>> called
>> on a large node in which most of the suffix lengths are the same.  The
>> time
>> required to add 200K entries had increased from around 3 seconds to
>> almost
>> 49 seconds.
>>
>> In order to address this we need to move the code for updating the
>> suffix
>> out of resize and instead just have it handled in the cases where we
>> are
>> pushing a node that increases the suffix length, or will decrease the
>> suffix length.
>>
>> Fixes: 5405afd1a306 ("fib_trie: Add tracking value for suffix length")
>> Reported-by: Robert Shearman <rshea...@brocade.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.du...@intel.com>
> 
> $ time sudo ip route restore < ~/allroutes
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists
> RTNETLINK answers: File exists

What are these errors all about?

Reply via email to