From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-oi0-x229.google.com (mail-oi0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c06::229]) (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 2CA543B25E for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 05:13:56 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail-oi0-x229.google.com with SMTP id s66so60990860oif.1 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 02:13:56 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dR/6pY10aLv04qEx029ugDbWeXv2w7d76ptfx1gfZww=; b=wTEQ4Mk31875EKl3vp29ID+AtRhIeTJU45e4F08Q1l0qlDzrMnKV0G2l4nBIsDHcW7 P08XA+J6ajeEmvjrD+BwW26oZsJahkuamLAJNjCoSJfe1lVp0rrlrrNg8YCCk7Npm8hn 3NfoTrT6ej/540kfgR1R0Ug9Ki5QMtX+UbURkT2A+C6QGA7oBXKbeAxIS/P79BGZFqa7 95+eA6N/+aw90jpns4CA15xvVhSWxHX1p/c1DkiTBwwP/P5otB+qfZ6w6NNS0oSOPVus dAah/BCnh/QmHDVYyVAUtoP2L0akmaFMZ7ERcd4T5hq4cUyYfMoXvKVFWlVum58vAPcI 2rrA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dR/6pY10aLv04qEx029ugDbWeXv2w7d76ptfx1gfZww=; b=Z//EO803M4zgm8uO1jgSiLuZrMGKwiUe8X8tgCCei3LREnyebDlfZF1nWQcwUnlz+u ooP21hXZiuMUCYeesRLku7lirfRS14ok9DMDlT53IHjXpvAUJWjhYADOw6EuaMS8vByK xN63qLI2CGcYEU2hDBJLpb/6dKX9FOfnbeAq4++WYWSM6FN0dbZ1kzUejSxb4pa/xG8e V35bqDZFH0Secx+XI+gIX7WeiY4miej1pnu5qiSZOMFZA3DTglHObo8ORi/+LI/9Wr1T SW7EePk1dlfi0usO+rjy/6l4oUVOLrNUh7X7CvZcNDbg+UgsJAhz0e/y8mP3LV0mmgrc bzaQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tI5At4ZbLim7/ZMN9FG3TNmWYm/7fXyLtSdYsfXxVyI2UVI+xYq3j+qB+ZQDbg8rTEbfHOH7Zz43oVSMA== X-Received: by 10.202.88.9 with SMTP id m9mr633562oib.66.1468401235290; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 02:13:55 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.202.230.71 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 02:13:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <11fa6d16-21e2-2169-8d18-940f6dc11dca@nbd.name> <097af8e4-5393-8e1b-1748-36233e605867@nbd.name> From: Dave Taht Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:13:54 +0200 Message-ID: To: Felix Fietkau Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net, linux-wireless , Michal Kazior , =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] TCP performance regression in mac80211 triggered by the fq code X-BeenThere: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 09:13:56 -0000 On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Felix Fietkau wrote: >> To me this implies a contending lock issue, too much work in the irq >> handler or too delayed work in the softirq handler.... >> >> I thought you were very brave to try and backport this. > I don't think this has anything to do with contending locks, CPU > utilization, etc. The code does something to the packets that TCP really > doesn't like. With your 70% idle figure, I am inclined to agree... could you get an airca= p of the two different tests? - as well as a regular packetcap taken at the client or server? And put somewhere I can get at them? What version of OSX are you running? I will setup an ath9k box shortly... --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht Let's go make home routers and wifi faster! With better software! http://blog.cerowrt.org