Re: [RFC net-next] ipv6: Use destination address determined by IPVS

To: Julian Anastasov <ja@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next] ipv6: Use destination address determined by IPVS
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, lvs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mark Brooks <mark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Phil Oester <kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2013 08:47:33 +0200
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 09:39:26AM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
>       Hello,
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2013, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 07:37:10PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > > 
> > >   Problem with process stack? May be some packet loop
> > > happens? Because I can not reproduce such problem in my
> > > virtual setup, I tested TEE too, with careful packet
> > > matching and 1 CPU. Should I assume that you don't have such
> > > oops when the patch is not applied, with the same TEE rule?
> > 
> > Oh, sorry, you are right. It happens with an unpatched net-next  kernel, 
> > too.
> > 
> > I inserted the TEE rule in mangel/OUTGOING and had only one route, ip -6 r a
> > default via fe80::1 dev eth0 which at the time of the panic was actually not
> > reachable.
>       Thanks for the confirmation! I'll try later
> to reproduce such problem with TEE, it is interesting
> to know the real reason for this loop.

Yup, I have a patch in works wich defers the ndisc_send_ns call in
rt6_probe into a workqueue out of the call stack. This should solve
the problem.

Still wonder if there is a nicer api as to create a new structure and pass the
arguments via container_of dereferencing to the deferred function (and I
don't think async calls are useable there).



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>