On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 01:32:18PM +0200, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On Friday 02 September 2011 12:55:08 Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 2, 2011 at 12:39, Luka Perkov <open...@lukaperkov.net> wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 02, 2011 at 10:46:37AM +0200, Florian Fainelli wrote: > > >> On Friday 02 September 2011 00:55:54 Luka Perkov wrote: > > >> > Also in linux-2.6.39.4/kernel/Kconfig.preempt you will see for > > >> > CONFIG_PREEMPT: > > >> > > > >> > Select this if you are building a kernel for a desktop or > > >> > embedded system with latency requirements in the milliseconds > > >> > range > > > > > > Please look at the kernel config file above. You will see that > > > CONFIG_PREEMPT should be used on embedded systems... > > > > ... with latency requirements in the milliseconds range. > > Indeed, that's the part I am concerned with, along with the memory footprint. > Any code should be able to work with and without Preemption enabled. Your > patch remains a workaround for now.
Please try to reproduce the issue with nmap on your devices. Run nmap like I wrote on your PC and see what will your router do (you are testing it's ability to handle many nat connections). Try it with and without my patch and post what happened. Luka _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
