From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 859C93CB4D; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 16:40:43 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1611351637; bh=lPXJZsb7P6mYoF2Dtvb4JKjwCkO1co8/BeVetg/mPqQ=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To; b=P8uNpvGUjbYkQBW5FmPtRYyQA1qggMx6O4Vm/ppafYmVSiY9BZKtpeAcJ9Zi6D1JE F5yUP/6L/SySk+0ud5ikluk76hlQJldxdBpA2E5+qE1YrgJMHjNMhY+GV2V6IJx2zQ 5jaecso2GNNh6k8uBezkVASfte62RnR+ekvRooMg= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Received: from [192.168.42.229] ([95.116.24.251]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx104 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MMXUN-1lKrjf42QJ-00JYy4; Fri, 22 Jan 2021 22:40:37 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.17\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 22:40:35 +0100 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Toke_H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?= , cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net, Y via Bloat Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <626C02F8-C761-44B1-A5B0-0B55B564BC94@gmx.de> References: <87turceco5.fsf@toke.dk> <557C22F5-BF2E-478A-8C48-BE52F9C75256@jonathanfoulkes.com> <875z3o65c9.fsf@toke.dk> To: Jonathan Foulkes X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.17) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:8UPhXlP8Bv3hDBo7sdu7zFodRb7KYWTEFsva2e4CYzyiYCKCdLL 9ze/lgw/LXdHXLpQrSV1k1hrJlOtQZOfr/AdSStfZVHEUWBWOiZAuZgpN/TBd1Bz+PKByVl un1IJR3bdNa3iVf3F9SDQiWymlcsBloCdL+4yVRikb22QohD8NUbQ8NixpwgaUSc2YfI376 VkCuacf8kZv2w3ObxeV6Q== X-Spam-Flag: NO X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:ogCkA9DPjjM=:rcaVWJgioQDZR0Q0KKuu/D WFgH/pPsKzYFYO7EzcIbtq4QrEQDBIZqP3VoWzo6g0OXcUyyJlmKgxPc6+4utxqKkAedfcLj8 1jP/rkStp7c/eCnj+xFfgePZxsQxWbWLFgYY+mIPP/u1wOWlh7Slcet90/lfckXdIb/zTYve+ 1w6nTNqh5TgKR2Y1ivimDh6YcxwKd+BmA0CLBMNFVUII+QzkivmZ6ndVuH+bfVi0d3pwEjsKM 9igjY3LPHkhtljY01v15ZNhjiszjbafyOkcNJ592deyaE9105PXlbljlblsFsOUki2ak8YgOP LWzaQhbjJ85LVF5KUkT3S0BKQz6Hf/gjntZNsNsg/fLB5tV9AZWJaqBrktcJksbFVentXGmEb kPjv29eTkf8V6/7Efg/JitKjWa8+/G4agzNuttr8Kl8vMlOtTUjtXyC/qGB9EFXrWH2kRClQ6 SQPurmavOevuV9SDU2hicfnEyawVuoO0r+W8ADuGhwqltSlxJCVW46AyXPnRDR2MUKcxQgbkE 9ZXnaxgJUitJNQLw4oK3SLFHMbakpfV0k8t5fw4d6ZGUn8Zj7cHNk+VzUBPWbUNW1nc3HBeE2 CNwkj82a+rOczb0kmb1ShhU1aCRX/9/vNT9yvVyxGGRYkA2p6nMm1m54hwGJtQhFX2XmoaIsc yvGW6BdFq5BcNGVOuOpIfQEfXBRmGX6P0m3fNI43DEs07rrHpfgRS9Cd3Fk/is3BV+iemBlME syzcyGDSzOucUIjxLc3q2CEMjd2lDNxNx/zFxhJVzxbnalnckO102TRwUY4Gv8NzObvGdr/5b oCD42SQqT0YuQi0RmQNVXQnhi2J1VAIyL3JTXSobihtLsmQByagwmxLpWx0FL16BJ4t0stYue ZGpljtxd7O9hQBZdlJJw== Subject: Re: [Bloat] New OpenWrt release fixing several dnsmasq CVEs X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2021 21:40:43 -0000 Could you try to run top or htop and look at the CPU load? I could = imagine that the fixes dnsmasq might have some CPU spikes that simply = leave not enough cycles for the traffic shaper? Best Regards Sebastian > On Jan 22, 2021, at 22:25, Jonathan Foulkes = wrote: >=20 > I figure there should be no inter-dependencies there, but the = side-effect of the new dnsmasq is pretty serious. >=20 > I did not install .6, I only performed an opkg update of the dnamasq = package itself. So kernal is the same in my case. >=20 > But others running a full .6 build report similar QoS issues. >=20 > I regressed back to .4 and all is good on the QoS front, waiting until = a new drop of dnsmasq before trying again. >=20 > - Jonathan >=20 >> On Jan 22, 2021, at 4:15 PM, Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen = wrote: >>=20 >> Jonathan Foulkes writes: >>=20 >>> I installed the updated package on a 19.07.4 box running cake, and = QoS performance went down the tubes. >>> Last night it locked up completely while attempting to stream. >>>=20 >>> See the PingPlots others have posted to this forum thread, mine look = similar, went from constant sub 50ms to very spiky, then some loss, loss = increasing, and if high traffic, lock-up. >>> = https://forum.openwrt.org/t/security-advisory-2021-01-19-1-dnsmasq-multipl= e-vulnerabilities/85903/39 >>>=20 >>> load is low, sirq is low, so box does not seem stressed. >>>=20 >>> Any reason Cake would be sensitive to a dnsmasq bug? >>=20 >> No, not really. I mean, dnsmasq could be sending some traffic that >> interferes with stuff? Or it could be a kernel regression - the = release >> did bump the kernel version as well... >>=20 >> -Toke >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Bloat mailing list > Bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/bloat