Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] rtnetlink: allow to run selected handlers without rtnl

2017-08-09 Thread David Miller
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

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] rtnetlink: allow to run selected handlers without rtnl

2017-08-09 Thread David Miller
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

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] rtnetlink: allow to run selected handlers without rtnl

2017-08-09 Thread Florian Westphal
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

Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] rtnetlink: allow to run selected handlers without rtnl

2017-08-08 Thread David Miller
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