From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 12:57:47 +0200 > reminder of the bugfix : > > The rt_check_expire() has a serious problem on machines with large > route caches, and a standard HZ value of 1000. > > With default values, ie ip_rt_gc_interval = 60*HZ = 60000 ; > > the loop count : > > for (t = ip_rt_gc_interval << rt_hash_log; t >= 0; > > > overflows (t is a 31 bit value) as soon rt_hash_log is >= 16 (65536 > slots in route cache hash table). > > In this case, rt_check_expire() does nothing at all I'd like this bug fix as a seperate patch. Also, coding style problems in the spinlock part of the patch: + static spinlock_t *rt_hash_locks; That's a file static variable, no need to tab it at all. + if (*rthp == 0) continue ; Please put the continue on a seperate line, properly tabbed, and without a space between the continue and the closing semicolon. Please scan the rest of your patch for problems like this. So, again please submit a seperate patch for the overflow bug, then one for the locking changes, so they may be evaluated and applied seperately. Thanks a lot. - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
