[LEDE-DEV] [Feature Request]Discussion - Move everything to Namespaces?

Hi there; As a long time Openwrt -nee Lede user and sometimes bug reporter; I've been maintaining my own forks and builds for several different purposes for 10+ years now. I've gotten a lot out of the project personally and professionally and would just like to thank everyone for their

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

any measure of that. On 30 January 2018 at 10:48, Karl Palsson <ka...@tweak.net.au> wrote: > > Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote: >> Any chance I can convince you to use netperf + FLENT for doing >> your tests rather than iperf(3)? >> >>

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

In terms of what you need on the target netserver/netperf from ipkg is tiny and is all you need. On 30 January 2018 at 10:51, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote: > FLENT + RRUL testing is 4 up 4 down TCP streams with 4 different QoS > Markings, and then 4 different Qo

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

at 10:52, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote: > In terms of what you need on the target netserver/netperf from ipkg is > tiny and is all you need. > > On 30 January 2018 at 10:51, Joel Wirāmu Pauling <j...@aenertia.net> wrote: >> FLENT + RRUL testing is

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

Any chance I can convince you to use netperf + FLENT for doing your tests rather than iperf(3)? flent.org -Joel On 30 January 2018 at 03:12, Michael Richardson wrote: > > Laurent GUERBY wrote: > >> So that means that you have to do the performance

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

st performance boost I imagine would be to add GRO support. It >> turns out for good routing performance, GRO requires hardware >> checksumming, which is not supported by ag71xx in OpenWrt at the >> moment. > > Does the hardware actually support checksum offloads? > >>

Re: [LEDE-DEV] A state of network acceleration / test on Archer C7 v4

Hi as I also am using the archer c7's as my build targets (and c2600's) I am watching this keenly; is anyone else running openvswtich on these with the XDP patches? The c2600 which is arm a15 - currently really could do with optimization and probably is a much better choice for CPE. I would not

Re: [LEDE-DEV] U-Boot v2018.01 requiring GCC6

Shouldn't a jump to gcc 7.2 or 8 with the Retopoline patches included, be the target given meltdown/spectre mitigations? This is going to affect newer Arm (mvebu potentially) and atom/x86 builds - although these use grub generally so not so much specific to uboot not compiling. -Joel On 14