Just to be clear, speaking for iperf 2, the binding isn't to an interface but to an IP address. See this for a description . Linux supports SO_BINDTODEVICE but it's not straightforward per things like ARP so I didn't add support for this. Bob On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Isaac Konikoff wrote: > You can run flent/iperf/netperf client and server on the same box using a > candelatech kernel and then bind to specific interfaces. > > http://candelatech.com/private/downloads/r5.3.6/ct4.9.29+.x64.tar.gz > guest/guest > > flent example: > eth1 192.168.1.2 to DUT(AP LAN side) > wlan0 192.168.1.3 to DUT(AP wireless) > > netserver > flent -H 192.168.1.3 --local-bind 192.168.1.2 --swap-up-down -x > tcp_download -l 120 > > > iperf example: > eth1 192.168.86.103 > wlan0 192.168.86.101 > > iperf upload test > iperf -s -B 192.168.86.103 -i10 > iperf -c 192.168.86.103 -B 192.168.86.101 -i10 -t120 > > iperf download test > iperf -s -B 192.168.86.101 -i10 > iperf -c 192.168.86.101 -B 192.168.86.103 -i10 -t120 > > > On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 5:57 AM, Pete Heist wrote: > >> >> On Nov 5, 2017, at 2:42 AM, Bob McMahon wrote: >> >> I have some brix with realtek and run ptpd installed with fedora 25. >> The corrections are in the 25 microsecond range, though there are >> anomalies. These are used for wifi DUTs that go into RF enclosures. >> >> [root@hera ~]# tail -n 1 /var/log/ptpd2.stats >> 2017-11-04 18:33:46.723476, slv, 0cc47afffea87386(unknown)/1, >> 0.000000000, -0.000018381, 0.000000000, -0.000018463, 1528.032750001, >> S, 0.000000000, 0, -0.000018988, 1403, 1576, 17, -0.000018463, 0.000000000 >> >> For LAN/WAN traffic, I tend to use the intel quad server adapters in a >> supermicro mb desktop with 8 or more real cores. (I think the data center >> class machines are worth it.) >> >> >> Thanks for the info. I was wondering how large the PTP error would be >> with software timestamps, and I see it’s not bad for most purposes. >> >> Which Realtek Linux driver does your brix use, and is it stable? The >> r8169 driver’s BQL support was reverted at some point and it doesn’t look >> like that has changed. >> >> I trust that the extra cores can help, particularly for tests with high >> flow counts, but my project budget won’t allow it, and used hardware is too >> much to think about at the moment. >> >> Do you (or anyone) know of any problems with running the Flent client and >> server on the same box? In the case of the Proliant Microserver, the >> Broadcom 5720 adapter should have separate PCI data paths for each NIC. I >> guess the bottleneck will still mainly be the CPU. To get some idea of >> what's possible on my current hardware, I tried running rrul_be_nflows >> tests with the Flent client and server on the same box, through its local >> adapter (with MTU set to 1500) with my current Mac Mini (2.26 GHz Core2 Duo >> P7550). I know that doesn’t predict how it will work over Ethernet, but >> it’s a start. >> >> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MVxGsreiGKNXhfkMIheN >> FrH_GVllFfiH9RU5ws5l_aY/edit#gid=1583696271 >> >> Although total throughput is pretty good for a low-end CPU, I’m not sure >> I’d trust the results above 64/64 flows. 256/256 flows was an epic fail, >> but I won’t be doing that kind of test. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Make-wifi-fast mailing list >> Make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net >> https://lists.bufferbloat.net/listinfo/make-wifi-fast >> > >