From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "mout.gmx.net", Issuer "TeleSec ServerPass DE-1" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E4B421F4F7 for ; Wed, 3 Sep 2014 12:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hms-beagle.home.lan ([93.194.233.219]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx002) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M4Gup-1YFIZC09Ap-00rlPz; Wed, 03 Sep 2014 21:23:01 +0200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\)) From: Sebastian Moeller In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 3 Sep 2014 21:22:58 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <83C39F40-5D07-43B4-8D3A-5A087CCB2735@gmx.de> References: <87ppfijfjc.fsf@toke.dk> <4FF4917C-1B6D-4D5F-81B6-5FC177F12BFC@gmail.com> <4DA71387-6720-4A2F-B462-2E1295604C21@gmail.com> <0DB9E121-7073-4DE9-B7E2-73A41BCBA1D1@gmail.com> <0D3E3220-C12A-4238-974B-D83D13EF354E@gmail.com> To: Aaron Wood X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:TlPPyCjWE/X+8++avTjcf8zzz2dpAWClhoQm9TJiST73ftrIPuN VjrW1i82AoKF4cku0kmL9H7fqY2lY/e0Gj6ykiV3kqRRyDzHYvRzcy79Aupo7477mxA+bCW LgEMI8WAj+EIAyHd+zDvjMi7uItbG2KoqujpF7aXlbJV2G1nxLdECZvNqnijBoaV8l9MdJ3 KvHO9NgpnFtbsk7Yk1dbA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Cc: Jonathan Morton , "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" , bloat Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Bloat] Comcast upped service levels -> WNDR3800 can't cope... 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: Wed, 03 Sep 2014 19:23:35 -0000 Hi Aaron, On Sep 3, 2014, at 17:12 , Aaron Wood wrote: > On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 4:08 AM, Jonathan Morton = wrote: > Given that the CPU load is confirmed as high, the pcap probably isn't = as useful. The rest would be interesting to look at. >=20 > Are you able to test with smaller packet sizes? That might help to = isolate packet-throughput (ie. connection tracking) versus = byte-throughput problems. >=20 > - Jonathan Morton > =20 > Doing another test setup will take a few days (maybe not until the = weekend). But I can get the data uploaded, and do some preliminary = crunching on it. So the current SQM system allows to shape on multiple = interfaces, so you could set up the shaper on se00 and test between sw10 = and se00 (should work if you reliably get fast enough wifi connection, = something like combined shaped bandwidth <=3D 70% of wifi rate should = work). That would avoid the whole firewall and connection tracking = logic.=20 My home wifi environment is quite variable/noisy and not = well-suited for this test: with rrul_be I got stuck at around 70Mbps = combined bandwidth, with different distributions of the up and down-leg = for no-shaping, shaping to 50Mbps10Mbps, and shaping to 100Mbps50Mbps. = SIRQ got pretty much pegged at 96-99% during all netperf-wrapper runs, = so I assume this to be the bottleneck (the radio was in the > 200mbps = range during the test with occasional drops to 150mbps). So my = conclusion would: be it really is the shaping that is limited on my = wndr3700v2 with cerowrt 3.10.50-1, again if I would be confident about = the measurement which I am not (but EOUTOFTIME). That or my rf = environment might only allow for roughly 70-80Mbps combined throughput. = For what it is worth: test where performed between macbook running = macosx 10.9.4 and hp proliant n54l running 64bit openSuse 13.1, kernel = 3.11.10-17 (AMD turion with tg3 gbit ethernet adapter (BQL enabled), = running fq_codel on eth0), with shaping on the se00 interface. Best Regards Sebastian >=20 > -Aaron > _______________________________________________ > Cerowrt-devel mailing list > Cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net > https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/cerowrt-devel