From: Steve Snyder <R00020C@freescale.com>
To: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Can I reduce CPU use of conntrack/masq?
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2005 14:50:47 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200511021450.47657.R00020C@freescale.com> (raw)
Hello.
I am working on what amounts to a Ethernet to Ultra-Wide Band (UWB)
converter box. Packets are simply routed from 1 interface to
another.
This box is based on an ARM7TDMI CPU, running Linux 2.4.26, and the
network throughput of the box is CPU-limited. How limited? The
100Mbps/FD Ethernet can do no better than 35Mbps.
I've discovered that I can improve Ethernet throughput by about %20 by
removing the the conntrack/masq support from the kernel. The removal
is good only as a test, though, since I need this functionality to
move the packets between interfaces.
This is the relevant config:
CONFIG_IP_NF_CONNTRACK=y
CONFIG_IP_NF_IPTABLES=y
CONFIG_IP_NF_NAT=y
CONFIG_IP_NF_NAT_NEEDED=y
CONFIG_IP_NF_TARGET_MASQUERADE=y
Enabled at boot time like this:
/sbin/iptables -t nat -A POSTROUTING -o uwb0 -j MASQUERADE
echo "1" > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
I wonder if I can improve conntrack/masq performance at the expense of
flexibility. This will be a closed system, with simple and static
routing. Are there any trade-offs I can make to sacrifice unneeded
flexibility in routing for reduced CPU utilization in conntrack/masq?
Thanks.
next reply other threads:[~2005-11-02 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-11-02 19:50 Steve Snyder [this message]
2005-11-02 20:23 ` Antonio Vargas
2005-11-02 20:51 ` Steve Snyder
2005-11-02 21:36 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=200511021450.47657.R00020C@freescale.com \
--to=r00020c@freescale.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®