|
Hello,
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017, Inju Song wrote:
> > Yep, then we should catch .upd_dest and to use last_weight.
> > In fact, adding last_weight to IPVS core should be separate
> > patch to apply before the MH patch.
> >
>
> Ok. So should I send patch about adding last_weight to IPVS core
> before appling the MH patch? Then I will.
Yes, keep both patches in same patchset, patch 1 for
last_weight and patch 2 for MH. You should send them by
changing version until all issues are resolved. As result,
it would be easier for Simon to apply them.
> > locks are not needed, configuration is serialzed by
> > using __ip_vs_mutex, the configuration methods run concurrently
> > only with packet processing and we use RCU for the table.
> >
>
> Ok. then I will use RCU for the mh_setup table.
Nothing different from what was used in last MH version and
what is in SH (ip_vs_sh_reassign): changing table entries
with RCU primitives.
Regards
--
Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|
