From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qk0-x231.google.com (mail-qk0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::231]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBB783B2A3 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 16:55:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-qk0-x231.google.com with SMTP id a186so2242930qkf.0 for ; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:subject:to:references:cc:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1VR2D0qDy0rkUS0w/l/XC82asUc5lBGCx0y7hp0sfZs=; b=zprzR+CSkMubZYAUOAWDQG1zLJ03rrXzjGuf7kefd4QdyxxkeBQBV+QXyIqchct9kv lWLAp6l0XOxPKmq+s66+pbMtlnOujLdOC2sAAXqkbg61NBY8X59a1DVpfq4+ECA8kVhQ TVsq/Qt7VFrDCnfDVqyRZRz6tzc2RRPrqym3g858tlHsVPx2/56Yk3yhe+RdZplZ/+7H HICLRhr7xMnzVK0+SNlWOg4l/6EfOZ/TplwRRWx8pmY4jHe/UNk6HQBhcCvhH+U+awPR MdZ4rVEIMU6plpz8x5e3K2M33KbXb+AmtmseNZFEPUMu6U9oPjx/Z0RKcRna2mAWldT2 92ww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:subject:to:references:cc:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=1VR2D0qDy0rkUS0w/l/XC82asUc5lBGCx0y7hp0sfZs=; b=Rzj2M+8q9g1wIDsewJTNegHkX2mjsdGIQ2VJvCqt0Iaj0bsDX19A4ZpiKVGfmsyXcM jJrObRoVkbT/s1oi+t09yY4q7QQjG3Jl0hJI3f2LIGvtZ+jeD0raitD/5XNOePwjfaBi eY2/U2GSA9XWD7Nzyti/pXIOHszrW3M6B3sosDjoCeeZpcXBn05U9yqKDj8ClgPQtTeE aVNI4Ffkt37du0wLBk8GZ/f5uiK99LjtWlBniwUpkyxhO54OvcIElHx+RUoMAGAjjqec 3ABtKy1YpSAtMpsyK2zIaAgXzoUbibuu7oFqcXuGIdv1D6spSkvgW1duqMVmAWJ3Ppg7 I4UQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKfFABRqB/G5FAW7kEKcvdISU08gKc3nEA7JOj/foYB/mfBbNca2eRW/W3j4GySUw== X-Received: by 10.237.32.230 with SMTP id 93mr22960897qtb.19.1465937700162; Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:55:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.100.0.115] ([96.84.219.81]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id 92sm8694663qgk.3.2016.06.14.13.54.58 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:54:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Richard Smith To: Dave Taht , Dheeran Senthilvel References: Cc: lede-dev@lists.infradead.org, "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Message-ID: <57606F22.2060704@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 16:54:58 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [LEDE-DEV] WRT1900ACS Testing X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 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: Tue, 14 Jun 2016 20:55:00 -0000 On 05/20/2016 05:16 PM, Dave Taht wrote: > We had found some pretty major performance problems on this hardware > as of a few months ago. I am curious if they still exist? A whole > bunch of benchmarks went by on the cerowrt-devel list, also. Sorry I'm late on a response. I've been buried with work lately and haven't been paying much attention to mailing lists. > They were: > > 1) broken local ethernet network stack - running 4 copies of netperf > against it - one would grab all the bandwidth and the other three > barely even start or hang completely. I confirmed your behavior on the 1900ACS using OpenWRT. I opted for flent rrul_be and rrul tests rather than multiple netperfs though. I'm happy to rejigger my build to be LEDE, rebuild, install, and run the test again. > 2) No BQL in the ethernet driver Dunno about this one. > 3) Wifi was horribly overbuffered in general > 4) Wifi would crash against flent's rrul test. I certainly saw these behaviors as well but I've not run rrul against the WiFi in quite a while and I seem to remember a wireless firmware update happening since I last ran the test. I'll re-run and see. -- Richard A. Smith