On 06/04/2015 08:52 PM, Herbert Xu wrote:
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 09:27:27AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
sorry for bothering you - I don't see this patch in any of your trees,
and it is marked as "changes requested" in patchwork. Did I look
at the wrong places, do you still plan to apply the pa
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 09:27:27AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>
> sorry for bothering you - I don't see this patch in any of your trees,
> and it is marked as "changes requested" in patchwork. Did I look
> at the wrong places, do you still plan to apply the patch as-is,
> or do you expect some cha
On 06/04/2015 11:59 AM, David Miller wrote:
From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 09:27:27 -0700
sorry for bothering you - I don't see this patch in any of your trees,
and it is marked as "changes requested" in patchwork. Did I look
at the wrong places, do you still plan to apply the patch
On Thu, 2015-06-04 at 11:59 -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Guenter Roeck
> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 09:27:27 -0700
>
> > sorry for bothering you - I don't see this patch in any of your trees,
> > and it is marked as "changes requested" in patchwork. Did I look
> > at the wrong places, do you sti
From: Guenter Roeck
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2015 09:27:27 -0700
> sorry for bothering you - I don't see this patch in any of your trees,
> and it is marked as "changes requested" in patchwork. Did I look
> at the wrong places, do you still plan to apply the patch as-is,
> or do you expect some changes ?
On Sat, May 16, 2015 at 05:10:19PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Herbert Xu
> Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 21:16:28 +0800
>
> > On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 01:02:57PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> >> From: Herbert Xu
> >> Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 13:58:24 +0800
> >>
> >> > The current rhashtable rehash
On Thu, 2015-05-21 at 01:53 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 05/15/15 at 08:06am, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 07:37:56AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > >
> > > This solves the corruption thanks Herbert.
> >
> > Great.
> >
> > > But wasn't rhashtable meant to be faster ? ;)
> >
>
On 05/15/15 at 08:06am, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 07:37:56AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> > This solves the corruption thanks Herbert.
>
> Great.
>
> > But wasn't rhashtable meant to be faster ? ;)
>
> Is it, that's news to me :)
Eric, can you share the scripts you used to
From: Herbert Xu
Date: Sat, 16 May 2015 21:16:28 +0800
> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 01:02:57PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Herbert Xu
>> Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 13:58:24 +0800
>>
>> > The current rhashtable rehash code is buggy and can't deal with
>> > parallel insertions/removals without c
