From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Message-ID: <5166987B.4030501@mojatatu.com> Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:03:23 -0400 From: Jamal Hadi Salim MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1365442863-32394-1-git-send-email-antonio@open-mesh.com> <1365442863-32394-2-git-send-email-antonio@open-mesh.com> <20130409075606.GB3771@open-mesh.com> <51641049.3030100@mojatatu.com> <20130409135143.GA5177@open-mesh.com> <5164387D.8080700@mojatatu.com> <20130410165434.GB5177@open-mesh.com> <20130410134609.46bcaeae@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <20130411105628.GA4717@open-mesh.com> In-Reply-To: <20130411105628.GA4717@open-mesh.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Bridge] [PATCH 1/3] if.h: add IFF_BRIDGE_RESTRICTED flag List-Id: Linux Ethernet Bridging List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Antonio Quartulli Cc: Stephen Hemminger , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "David S. Miller" On 13-04-11 06:56 AM, Antonio Quartulli wrote: > I just realised that :) > > By installing ebtables (meaning modules + userspace tool) my iperf test result > drops from 81Mbps to 66Mbps: former without, latter with ebtables module enabled. > I did this test between two devices connected with Fast Ethernet. > Please try tc like i said earlier ;-> cheers, jamal > I thought that most of the code is in netfilter, so shared with iptables, hence > I expected a reasonable overhead why this is much worse. > > Does anybody have a clue about this? I should probably start a new thread on the > netfilter mailing list. > > However this problem makes ebtables unusable at all. > > Suggestions are welcome :) > > Cheers, > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jamal Hadi Salim Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] if.h: add IFF_BRIDGE_RESTRICTED flag Date: Thu, 11 Apr 2013 07:03:23 -0400 Message-ID: <5166987B.4030501@mojatatu.com> References: <1365442863-32394-1-git-send-email-antonio@open-mesh.com> <1365442863-32394-2-git-send-email-antonio@open-mesh.com> <20130409075606.GB3771@open-mesh.com> <51641049.3030100@mojatatu.com> <20130409135143.GA5177@open-mesh.com> <5164387D.8080700@mojatatu.com> <20130410165434.GB5177@open-mesh.com> <20130410134609.46bcaeae@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <20130411105628.GA4717@open-mesh.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Stephen Hemminger , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "bridge@lists.linux-foundation.org" , "David S. Miller" To: Antonio Quartulli Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20130411105628.GA4717@open-mesh.com> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: bridge-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org Errors-To: bridge-bounces@lists.linux-foundation.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On 13-04-11 06:56 AM, Antonio Quartulli wrote: > I just realised that :) > > By installing ebtables (meaning modules + userspace tool) my iperf test result > drops from 81Mbps to 66Mbps: former without, latter with ebtables module enabled. > I did this test between two devices connected with Fast Ethernet. > Please try tc like i said earlier ;-> cheers, jamal > I thought that most of the code is in netfilter, so shared with iptables, hence > I expected a reasonable overhead why this is much worse. > > Does anybody have a clue about this? I should probably start a new thread on the > netfilter mailing list. > > However this problem makes ebtables unusable at all. > > Suggestions are welcome :) > > Cheers, >