Re: test

To: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: test
Cc: netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 02:11:18 -0800
On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 11:26:27AM +0200, Julian Anastasov wrote:

>       If 'time to expire' is after current time then continue,
> i.e. current time didn't reached the limit, seems correct,
> no need to patch. For better reading and to match
> ip_vs_lblcr_check_expire() it can be converted to:
> if (time_before(now, en->lastuse+sysctl_ip_vs_lblcr_expiration))
>       continue;

D'oh.  I noticed the use of time_before() further down in
ip_vs_lblcr_check_expire(), but not the reversed arguments, hence my

I still suspect there may be something not quite right, or which could
perhaps do with some tuning.  It's difficult to see exactly how it's
working internally, since there's currently nothing to get a summary of
the dest_sets to userspace.  I'll follow up if I find anything.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lvs-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: test, Simon Kirby <=