That should be fine. Is codel running only for latest backports? Are there any openwrt changes to configure codel? Can you plz try to reset master branch to older commit and validate?
-Rajkumar ________________________________________ From: Roman Yeryomin [leroi.li...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 9:30 PM To: Manoharan, Rajkumar Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Rajkumar Manoharan Subject: Re: ath10k performance, master branch from 20160407 Rajkumar, I took backports from git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/backports/backports.git, took latest ath tree from git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/kvalo/ath.git, generated backports-output based on ath master branch, refreshed openwrt patches. And saw big performance degradation. Am I doing something wrong? Regards, Roman On 8 April 2016 at 18:34, Manoharan, Rajkumar <rmano...@qti.qualcomm.com> wrote: > Roman, > > Which backports version are you using? I don't see codel changes in > ath.git/wireless-drivers.git. > Hope you are using same firmware. > > -Rajkumar > ________________________________________ > From: ath10k <ath10k-boun...@lists.infradead.org> on behalf of Roman Yeryomin > <leroi.li...@gmail.com> > Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 8:14 PM > To: ath10k@lists.infradead.org > Subject: ath10k performance, master branch from 20160407 > > Hello! > > I've seen performance patches were commited so I've decided to give it > a try (using 4.1 kernel and backports). > The results are quite disappointing: TCP download (client pov) dropped > from 750Mbps to ~550 and UDP shows completely weird behavour - if > generating 900Mbps it gives 30Mbps max, if generating 300Mbps it gives > 250Mbps, before (latest official backports release from January) I was > able to get 900Mbps. > Hardware is basically ap152 + qca988x 3x3. > When running perf top I see that fq_codel_drop eats a lot of cpu. > Here is the output when running iperf3 UDP test: > > 45.78% [kernel] [k] fq_codel_drop > 3.05% [kernel] [k] ag71xx_poll > 2.18% [kernel] [k] skb_release_data > 2.01% [kernel] [k] r4k_dma_cache_inv > 1.73% [kernel] [k] eth_type_trans > 1.24% [kernel] [k] build_skb > 1.20% [mac80211] [k] ieee80211_tx_dequeue > 1.03% [kernel] [k] __delay > 0.98% [kernel] [k] fq_codel_enqueue > 0.94% [kernel] [k] __netif_receive_skb_core > 0.93% [kernel] [k] skb_release_head_state > 0.88% [ath10k_core] [k] ath10k_htt_tx > 0.87% [kernel] [k] __dev_queue_xmit > 0.84% [mac80211] [k] ieee80211_tx_status > 0.81% [kernel] [k] __build_skb > 0.80% [mac80211] [k] __ieee80211_subif_start_xmit > 0.77% [kernel] [k] br_handle_frame_finish > 0.75% [kernel] [k] __qdisc_run > 0.73% [kernel] [k] skb_recycler_consume > 0.72% [kernel] [k] kfree_skb > 0.72% [kernel] [k] get_page_from_freelist > 0.69% [kernel] [k] br_fdb_update > 0.69% [kernel] [k] br_handle_frame > 0.67% [kernel] [k] __copy_user_common > 0.66% [kernel] [k] __skb_flow_dissect > 0.65% [ath10k_core] [k] ath10k_txrx_tx_unref > 0.60% [kernel] [k] kmem_cache_alloc > 0.60% [mac80211] [k] sta_addr_hash > 0.56% [kernel] [k] fq_codel_dequeue > 0.53% [kernel] [k] __local_bh_enable_ip > 0.50% [kernel] [k] __br_fdb_get > > What could be the reason? > I've seen there are some patches from Michal which touch fq_codel, > would those help or not? > > > Regards, > Roman > > _______________________________________________ > ath10k mailing list > ath10k@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k
