From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wr1-x42a.google.com (mail-wr1-x42a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::42a]) (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 A6FD93B29E for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 01:24:05 -0500 (EST) Received: by mail-wr1-x42a.google.com with SMTP id g12so4442004wrm.5 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:24:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=jb3aERdBfAfzU0nCWHHF4xAWhrlRv5sx2RLgofavdow=; b=MMWlaLiZ7hjTbT/DOzvxtBV3qyoJ6n1zsjBy1eDJXutmI59OeyqfI3aoTZXdLfaqnO b5RSTanxtHfHoBhMrhbkcgubKmCSzU+w/dB9Vj8XTsLSG9wMOmeL34aq6XRN6jRSi0yi pybrpXq8bga8GDZo15aGrFqIqnqwhk+hv5TI0RpQ3EkBrhiv71O3C42mYFQpTkiywiiS 7PBl3g5LTK07BJ6sy2ffLIv3OzNpicsftYeEFOZpRGRpo1Z+Z/akApqu4Gtu3F4WZS/d +FhmDsoEP3aklsOZ1kS7cL8fuu/6+KjqNeNoz+0b3Q4M1xqnQcYLvomT4tHJQysKYF54 eMTg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=jb3aERdBfAfzU0nCWHHF4xAWhrlRv5sx2RLgofavdow=; b=qIdqPlyF67i56RCExv0E8oMpm+a+euzelzRYoF6oG+QfY/Sw2dn3npSyPHaTmd0BNv +1u8n+9RowjmYeSbitFYejevRJtTDT0/B/eWXNdPVwghvDsTWVPKrYTYYgRCelL4gBTE p1TOSILxH9nQw0imyLQYsoS58R8X9PSfFtY2Y1VhCo0aD2hqufjo+yrVQ3MiJM7J+8ak 78tPwPqS2H/sFbCmxIsR1fQDcKo9wkhLOffLTybXFaCVDfN8qIKR0Eq1b1BtH4na7P/e b+zr4jkqGfGixr2q7zg5rUOFhoA8JhS+ZEY1i+ZtNf0jMNwVOGsAxKEkwJv+3zHUpoT4 +ypg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVVkf8fAz5NhOs0t/VPI7gXFotx6gD0gBaSxKg8tGKQpqLYgHo8 70VQ8OeE5ke81NUiMaxP5SXBpbN7H/wGlP7SnZc8fA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqw7q/NYtCy0DZRnI2Xs1aYBJwmQkjgvir2NFl77MPtRDr2L5KmHjz+IKq9aeJpOUOxHRD/+fUI3OX6vNtxjlBE= X-Received: by 2002:adf:afe3:: with SMTP id y35mr956134wrd.318.1551248644658; Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:24:04 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <874l9bperv.fsf@toke.dk> <875ztrxtq6.fsf@taht.net> In-Reply-To: From: Jon Pike Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2019 22:23:52 -0800 Message-ID: To: Dave Taht Cc: make-wifi-fast@lists.bufferbloat.net Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000006c598a0582da3877" Subject: Re: [Make-wifi-fast] bloated ath10k, extra latency at lower rates? 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, 27 Feb 2019 06:24:05 -0000 --0000000000006c598a0582da3877 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Somehow, the prior msg didnt get to the list... I've had a lot going on, so havent done detailed testing. Did a brief test that resulted in a lot of weird results, which gave the impression the -ct FW had problems and worse performance than the basic. Unexpected. But, too many variables... different router FW versions, different C7 HW versions, etc, so not conclusive at this point. I'll get back to it later= . On Sun, Feb 10, 2019, 3:08 PM Jon Pike wrote: > Well, OK to know that it's more expected behavior rather than a bug, an= d > great that there sounds like an improvement is on the way.. > > And to Dave's comment, have to check my notes, but am pretty sure the > master snapshot branch I ran a few weeks ago had a -ct firmware. Can't > remember now if I saw the large distance/latency change on that one. Whe= n > I get a chance I'll try comparing them. Might take a bit, home internet > access depends on the HW! > > On Sun, Feb 10, 2019, 12:40 PM Dave Taht >> Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen writes: >> > >> > >> The C7 has an older version of firmware. It would be interesting to >> benchmark the -ct version of the firmware. >> >> >> --0000000000006c598a0582da3877 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Somehow, the prior msg didnt get to the list...=C2= =A0 =C2=A0 I've had a lot going on,=C2=A0 so havent done detailed testi= ng.=C2=A0 Did a brief test that resulted in a lot of weird results, which g= ave the impression the -ct FW had problems and worse performance than the b= asic.=C2=A0 Unexpected.

= But,=C2=A0 too many variables...=C2=A0 =C2=A0different router FW versions, = different C7 HW versions, etc,=C2=A0 so not conclusive at this point.=C2=A0= I'll get back to it later.

On Sun, Feb 1= 0, 2019, 3:08 PM Jon Pike <jonpike54@gmail.com> wrote:
=
Well,=C2=A0 OK to kno= w that it's more expected behavior rather than a bug,=C2=A0 and great t= hat there sounds like an improvement is on the way..

And to Dave's comment, have to check my no= tes,=C2=A0 but am pretty sure the master snapshot branch I ran a few weeks = ago had a -ct firmware.=C2=A0 Can't remember now if I saw the large dis= tance/latency change on that one.=C2=A0 When I get a chance I'll try co= mparing them. Might take a bit, home internet access depends on the HW!

On Sun, Feb 10, 2019, 12:40 PM Dave Taht <dave@taht.net = wrote:
Toke H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rge= nsen <toke@redhat.com> writes:
>
>
The C7 has an older version of firmware. It would be interesting to
benchmark the -ct version of the firmware.=C2=A0


--0000000000006c598a0582da3877--