On 5/30/17 5:32 PM, Sowmini Varadhan wrote: > On (05/30/17 16:20), Stephen Hemminger wrote: >> >> Please don't copy/paste chunks of code. Instead refactor and make this >> into a helper function. > > sure, I have no problems with that, and as I pointed out, I've not > tested ipv6 for this yet either. I'll do all of this after getting > some feedback on the more basic issue here: > > I was first looking for comments on the more fundamental refcnt > management behind the fix (I'm surprised no one noticed this > before, is there some deep reason for leaving it like this, that > I am missing? Does it break something else?)
It has been noticed. I have not sent a patch since adjusting gc parameters will reclaim FAILED entries at whatever rate the user wants.
