On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 10:35:42PM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, 8 Nov 2015, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:49:25AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > >
> > > flush can provide many parameters. As there is no
> > > any kind of indication in t
Hello,
On Sun, 8 Nov 2015, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:49:25AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> >
> > flush can provide many parameters. As there is no
> > any kind of indication in the netlink message that all addresses
> > are removed, we can not avoid the prom
On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 07:31:38AM +0900, David Miller wrote:
> From: Neil Horman
> Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 16:56:41 -0500
>
> > All I'm doing is, in effect masking the promote_secondaries sysctl
> > for an interface doing a flush operation.
>
> Packets and other entities not controlled by RTNL ca
From: Neil Horman
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2015 16:56:41 -0500
> All I'm doing is, in effect masking the promote_secondaries sysctl
> for an interface doing a flush operation.
Packets and other entities not controlled by RTNL can see an inconsistent
state: no primary address on the interface.
You can a
On Sat, Nov 07, 2015 at 01:49:25AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Neil Horman wrote:
>
> > The solution is to recognize that its pointless to promote an address to be
> > a
> > new primary, if there is a possibility that it will just be removed in the
>
From: Julian Anastasov
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2015 01:49:25 +0200 (EET)
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Neil Horman wrote:
>
>> The solution is to recognize that its pointless to promote an address to be a
>> new primary, if there is a possibility that it will just be removed in the
>> near
>> future. As such
Hello,
On Fri, 6 Nov 2015, Neil Horman wrote:
> The solution is to recognize that its pointless to promote an address to be a
> new primary, if there is a possibility that it will just be removed in the
> near
> future. As such this patch peeks ahead to the next request in the provided
I recently got a report that, after a user added 40,000 addresses to an
interface and ran ip addr flush , their system blocked on interface access
for literally hours, and issued hundreds of hung task warnings. due to rtnl
being held during this operation.
While its certainly arguable that long de