Hi Jo, On 27.05.2016 12:45, Carl-Daniel Hailfinger wrote: > On 27.05.2016 10:33, Jo-Philipp Wich wrote: >> >> If a kmod is specifically disabled by default settings then it usually >> has a performance penalty attached with it, even when not loaded. >> >> I'd be grateful if someone could do some iperf throughput testing with >> and without kmod-ipt-debug built/enabled/loaded and see if it makes any >> difference at all. > > I did look at the code, and AFAICS the only code path affected by > compiling but not loading xt_TRACE is: > [...] > > If someone wants to perform iperf testing, the key to making the impact > of the additional code path measurable is to have a few hundred iptables > rules matching the iperf traffic. That way, the additional code path > gets maximum impact.
What would be the most useful iperf tests? LAN-Client to LAN-Client bridging, LAN-Client to Router, or something completely different? I can perform iperf testing, but I don't have enough hard disk space and CPU resources to build the required images for my Archer C7 v2. If anyone can provide images which only differ in availability of KernelPackage/ipt-debug, I will test them on my TP-Link Archer C7 v2 with iperf. Regards, Carl-Daniel _______________________________________________ Lede-dev mailing list Lede-dev@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/lede-dev
