[OpenWrt-Devel] Any interest in a 'ct' iperf3?

Ben Greear greearb at candelatech.com
Tue Oct 29 09:23:52 EDT 2019

On 10/28/2019 11:14 PM, Petr Štetiar wrote:
> Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com> [2019-10-28 14:42:32]:
> Hi Ben,
>> found and fixed a bunch of issues
> apart from lack of time, do you've any other good reason to not upstream those
> changes? :-)

The original SO_BINDTODEVICE patches were offered upstream
and there is no interest.  My recent changes would need
rebasing to clean them up before upstreaming, and I am not going
to spend any serious time on that since I'd still have to run
my own tree to get the SO_BINDTODEVICE patches and anything
else not accepted upstream.


>> and of course possibly added some new bugs.
> As always, those could be probably spotted by another pair of eyes during
> upstream review process.
>> Is there any interest in adding an iperf3-ct option to openwrt?
> I can't speak for the rest, but from my point of view we don't need extra
> package for that purpose.
>>   * Support SO_BINDTODEVICE.
>>   * Make sockets non-blocking to fix various ways the client and server can hang.
>>   * Server will recover from client doing bad things or dying unexpectedly.
>>   * Fix socket leaks
>>   * Allow compiling for win32 using mingw cross-compiler.
>>   * Report summary stats in all cases on both client and server.
> Those changes looks like a good upstream material.
> -- ynezz

Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org

More information about the openwrt-devel mailing list