From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x22a.google.com (mail-oi0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDCF221FA06 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:52:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by oiyy130 with SMTP id y130so95083702oiy.0 for ; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:52:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=jnEn31hkBAk1S8C5fY9LekEAUnGeMwVR+lze1f6M1Ww=; b=sLD/ytt/ZZPB2YHZuTDnO0Z0rsTidL5sRMUrec6WNKdvGgtrS3Y+ZZe+llmLv8atlY CBVKT5YYIfifsuzsy/JfYjgF5jB/I3HZQONtq7UWwvolNcwtDSc9Zyx/LljxmIgbck4V LruXmIBQ/MqiV4WXoQDmbLLxG1QCUMHR4l1L8/lefHGSLBwkzLYIbufIuDrfzk6JUylV sUBkYOfdUwcNGo8p15t9Sleak1jTnyTJuKGPMacJmd1L+sqMC9OW7icalAQYM0sVtqnk VgTN+GD/DKSqlNNC81KV86qNVKm60t430I8MQqD1qZcnKtF2lbkhWbkBgNthuklttjq0 16rA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.240.135 with SMTP id wa7mr4523246obc.63.1435431172752; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:52:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.202.105.129 with HTTP; Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:52:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <43D5C3CE-F1F4-4BA5-AEB9-55348661C7BA@gmx.de> Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 11:52:52 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Mikael Abrahamsson Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] performance numbers from WRT1200AC (Re: Latest build test - new sqm-scripts seem to work; "cake overhead 40" didn't) 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: Sat, 27 Jun 2015 18:53:22 -0000 Sigh. It is possible, maybe, to build something using this chipset that does not connect the wan port through the switch, built by someone else. Maybe some other manufacturer did that. I had first evaluated this chipset on the dual port mirabox, which as best as I recall had no switch, two genuine ethernet ports (but it ran WAY too hot and at the time, the kernel was ancient). On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 11:23 AM, Mikael Abrahamsson wro= te: > On Sat, 27 Jun 2015, Dave Taht wrote: > >> Maybe you are dropping at the internal switch? A lot of manufacturers >> ran everything through the switch, even the uplink, in recent years. >> This will make things hard to fix. > > > Looking at the vlans and pvids it looks like they've connected the SoC to > port 5 and 6 on the switch, port 4 is the "Internet" port, and 0-3 is LAN= 1-4 > port. Sigh, I had hoped at least eth0 (WAN/Internet) was a physically > dedicated port. > > root@OpenWrt:~# swconfig dev switch0 show > Global attributes: > enable_vlan: 0 > Port 0: > mask: 0x004e: (0) 1 2 3 6 > qmode: 0 > status: link: up, speed: 1000 Mbps, duplex: full > link: 1000 > pvid: 0 > Port 1: > mask: 0x004d: 0 (1) 2 3 6 > qmode: 0 > status: link: down > link: 0 > pvid: 0 > Port 2: > mask: 0x004b: 0 1 (2) 3 6 > qmode: 0 > status: link: down > link: 0 > pvid: 0 > Port 3: > mask: 0x0047: 0 1 2 (3) 6 > qmode: 0 > status: link: up, speed: 1000 Mbps, duplex: full > link: 1000 > pvid: 0 > Port 4: > mask: 0x0020: (4) 5 > qmode: 0 > status: link: up, speed: 1000 Mbps, duplex: full > link: 1000 > pvid: 0 > Port 5: > mask: 0x0010: 4 (5) > qmode: 0 > status: link: up, speed: 1000 Mbps, duplex: full > link: 1000 > pvid: 0 > Port 6: > mask: 0x000f: 0 1 2 3 (6) > qmode: 0 > status: link: up, speed: 1000 Mbps, duplex: full > link: 1000 > pvid: 0 > > > -- > Mikael Abrahamsson email: swmike@swm.pp.se --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht worldwide bufferbloat report: http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat And: What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone? https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast