Daniel Lezcano wrote: > Denis V. Lunev wrote: > > Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> Denis V. Lunev wrote: > >>> Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >>> > >>>> * the first one is the locking of the network namespace list by > >>>> rtnl_lock, so from the timer callback we can not browse the network > >>>> namespace list to check the age of the routes. It is a problem I would > >>>> like to talk with Denis if he has time > >>> From my point of view, the situation is clear. The timer should be > >>> per/namespace. The situation is completely different as one in IPv4. > >> We thought to make a timer per namespace for ipv6, but we are a little > >> afraid for the performances when there will be a lot of containers. > >> Anyway, we can do a timer per namespace and optimize that later. I will > >> cook a new patch to take into account that for the next week. > > > > IMHO not a problem. tcp_write_timer is per/socket timer. If this works > > efficiently, per/namespace one will work also. > > That's right, this is a good argument. By the way, the amount of work to > be done in the tcp_write_timer is perhaps smaller than the one done in > the ipv6 routing age check, no ? Anyway, I'm not against a timer per > namespace in this case, I already did a try before rolling back to a > for_each_net in the gc timer, that changes a little the API, but nothing We can easily make the netns list rcu protected to address this issue. If you're interested, I can prepare a patch tomorrow. > we can handle easily. > > _______________________________________________ Containers mailing list Containers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/containers
