Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[net\-next\s+1\/2\]\s+ipvs\:\s+batch\s+__ip_vs

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[net\-next\s+1\/2\]\s+ipvs\:\s+batch\s+__ip_vs_cleanup\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [net-next 1/2] ipvs: batch __ip_vs_cleanup (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2019 23:03:31 +0300 (EEST); Hello, OK, can you send v2 after removing the LIST_HEAD(list) from both patches, I guess, it is not needed. If you prefer, you can include these benchmark results too. Regards -- Julian Anastasov <ja; /html/lvs-devel/2019-07/msg00053.html (11,785 bytes)
2. Re: [net-next 1/2] ipvs: batch __ip_vs_cleanup (score: 1): Author: Haishuang Yan <yanhaishuang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2019 22:16:05 +0800; Hi, As the following benchmark testing results show, there is a little performance improvement: $ cat add_del_unshare.sh for i in `seq 1 100` do (for j in `seq 1 40` ; do unshare -n ipvsadm -A -t 17; /html/lvs-devel/2019-07/msg00044.html (14,240 bytes)
3. Re: [net-next 1/2] ipvs: batch __ip_vs_cleanup (score: 1): Author: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2019 23:39:52 +0300 (EEST); Hello, How much faster is to replace list_for_each_entry in ops_exit_list() with this one. IPVS can waste time in calls such as kthread_stop() and del_timer_sync() but I'm not sure we can solve it ea; /html/lvs-devel/2019-07/msg00040.html (12,670 bytes)
4. [net-next 1/2] ipvs: batch __ip_vs_cleanup (score: 1): Author: Haishuang Yan <yanhaishuang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:19:45 +0800; It's better to batch __ip_vs_cleanup to speedup ipvs connections dismantle. Signed-off-by: Haishuang Yan <yanhaishuang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- include/net/ip_vs.h | 2 +- net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_cor; /html/lvs-devel/2019-07/msg00025.html (13,097 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]