From: Ed W <lists@wildgooses.com>
To: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@medozas.de>
Cc: "Maciej Żenczykowski" <zenczykowski@gmail.com>,
netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Performance issue due to constant "modprobes"
Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 13:35:13 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4DA59881.1050501@wildgooses.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1104131406130.25539@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Hi
> In iptables, the options --enable-static and --enable-shared are
> semantically different from other projects.
Thanks for confirming - iptables also helpfully spells exactly this out
in the INSTALL doc (+1 for open source documentation!!)
>> Additionally, as helpfully pointed out by Jan, a chunk of my problem is
>> my static iptables apparently trying to probe a kernel module which
>> isn't incorporated into my kernel version. I can't immediately see a
>> solution to not uselessly probing for that (without patching iptables)?
>> Any ideas?
>
> I would have said it could be the missing SET module being the cause for
> your modprobe time accumulation, but since you also use iptables-restore
> that possibility, too, is eliminated.
Yes, although these modules are being probed for even on a zero
(missing) input to iptables-restore. However, that seems consistent
with a v1.4.10 iptables --enable-static based binary? Presumably this
just probes everything?
(To be clear my test in my previous email was NOT using your git commit
to delay mod probing)
I will have to retest with your commit and without my hack to see
exactly what is still being probed for
Thanks
Ed W
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-13 12:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-07 23:16 Performance issue due to constant "modprobes" Ed W
2011-04-08 0:18 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-08 17:11 ` Ed W
2011-04-08 0:47 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-08 17:11 ` Ed W
2011-04-08 19:54 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-08 23:22 ` Ed W
2011-04-08 23:42 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-09 20:39 ` Ed W
2011-04-09 22:30 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-12 21:03 ` Ed W
2011-04-12 22:05 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-13 11:08 ` Ed W
2011-04-13 12:06 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-13 9:10 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-13 11:35 ` Ed W
2011-04-13 12:13 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-13 12:35 ` Ed W [this message]
2011-04-13 12:45 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-13 16:45 ` Ed W
2011-04-13 19:20 ` Mr Dash Four
2011-04-14 7:07 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-14 7:13 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-14 7:19 ` Jan Engelhardt
2011-04-18 13:38 ` Patrick McHardy
2011-04-18 16:33 ` Ed W
2011-04-19 1:12 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-19 9:03 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-19 16:10 ` Ed W
2011-04-20 1:26 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-20 6:41 ` Maciej Żenczykowski
2011-04-20 7:31 ` Jozsef Kadlecsik
2011-04-20 8:54 ` Ed W
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4DA59881.1050501@wildgooses.com \
--to=lists@wildgooses.com \
--cc=jengelh@medozas.de \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=zenczykowski@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).