On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 22:07 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:01:03PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:52 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > >
> > > Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:49:02PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:01:03PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:52 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:49:02PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:31 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Tue, Nov 15, 2016 a
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:52 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:49:02PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:31 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > >
> > > Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:29:09PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:49:02PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:31 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:29:09PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>> >
>> > On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 20:51 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> > >
>> > > Tue, Nov 15, 2016 a
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 21:31 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:29:09PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 20:51 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> > >
> > > Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:46:06AM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 09:29:09PM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 20:51 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:46:06AM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>> >
>> > The patch that removed the FIB offload infrastructure was a bit too
>> > aggressive and
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 20:51 +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:46:06AM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
> >
> > The patch that removed the FIB offload infrastructure was a bit too
> > aggressive and also removed code needed to clean up us splitting the table
> > if additiona
Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 11:46:06AM CET, alexander.h.du...@intel.com wrote:
>The patch that removed the FIB offload infrastructure was a bit too
>aggressive and also removed code needed to clean up us splitting the table
>if additional rules were added. Specifically the function
>fib_trie_flush_extern
On Tue, 2016-11-15 at 05:46 -0500, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> The patch that removed the FIB offload infrastructure was a bit too
> aggressive and also removed code needed to clean up us splitting the table
> if additional rules were added. Specifically the function
> fib_trie_flush_external was cal
The patch that removed the FIB offload infrastructure was a bit too
aggressive and also removed code needed to clean up us splitting the table
if additional rules were added. Specifically the function
fib_trie_flush_external was called at the end of a new rule being added to
flush the foreign trie
10 matches
Mail list logo
