From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 52F3E21F127; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:58:44 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?q?Dave=20T=C3=A4ht?= To: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 06:58:40 -0700 Message-Id: <1345730322-6255-1-git-send-email-dave.taht@bufferbloat.net> X-Mailer: git-send-email 1.7.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Subject: [Cerowrt-devel] Working towards reducing memory issues in cerowrt X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 13:58:45 -0000 So I was mostly fiddling with codel itself, trying to make it work better on long RTTs, when the memory and oom issues came up. The two patches following for codel are experimental. It will take me multiple days to prove out/dismiss as junk and/or further improve these... During that test cycle I have two patches eric dumazet has suggested on the codel list to convinceport/finish/test out, as well as (perhaps) a third patch that might control udp better, to deal better with the memory problem... ... which will need to apply on top of these patches... so if you are doing your own builds of cero/openwrt or a mainline kernel, please feel free to try these and share what, if anything, happens differently, on whatever tests you can dream up.