From: Florian Westphal
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:19:28 +0200
> Would you accept a v2 if i don't touch ipv6 routes for the time being?
>
> I would then audit those again. At the very least inet6_rtm_getroute should
> be able to work without rtnl lock (i.e., use a different lock
From: Florian Westphal
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 10:19:28 +0200
> David Miller wrote:
>> From: Florian Westphal
>> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 18:02:29 +0200
>>
>> > Unfortunately RTNL mutex is a performance issue, e.g. a cpu adding
>> > an ip
David Miller wrote:
> From: Florian Westphal
> Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 18:02:29 +0200
>
> > Unfortunately RTNL mutex is a performance issue, e.g. a cpu adding
> > an ip address prevents other cpus from seemingly unrelated tasks
> > such as dumping tc
From: Florian Westphal
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 18:02:29 +0200
> Unfortunately RTNL mutex is a performance issue, e.g. a cpu adding
> an ip address prevents other cpus from seemingly unrelated tasks
> such as dumping tc classifiers.
It is related if somehow the TC entries refer to