From: Cong Wang
Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:44:26 -0700
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Sorin Dumitru wrote:
>> We're seeing some softlockups from this function when there
>> are a lot fdb entries on a vxlan device. Taking the lock for
>> each bucket instead of the whole table is enough to fix
On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 8:44 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Sorin Dumitru wrote:
>> We're seeing some softlockups from this function when there
>> are a lot fdb entries on a vxlan device. Taking the lock for
>> each bucket instead of the whole table is enough to fix that
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Sorin Dumitru wrote:
> We're seeing some softlockups from this function when there
> are a lot fdb entries on a vxlan device. Taking the lock for
> each bucket instead of the whole table is enough to fix that.
>
Hmm, then the spinlock could be moved into each buc
From: Sorin Dumitru
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 10:42:04 +0300
> We're seeing some softlockups from this function when there
> are a lot fdb entries on a vxlan device. Taking the lock for
> each bucket instead of the whole table is enough to fix that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sorin Dumitru
Applied, thank
We're seeing some softlockups from this function when there
are a lot fdb entries on a vxlan device. Taking the lock for
each bucket instead of the whole table is enough to fix that.
Signed-off-by: Sorin Dumitru
---
drivers/net/vxlan.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
