On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 12:28 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> 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?
I think it is the fact that he is trying to restore "all routes" and
some of the routes already exist such as those associated with his
default network interface.
- Alex
