On 2016-07-12 14:44, Dave Taht wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 2:28 PM, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <t...@toke.dk> wrote:
>> Felix Fietkau <n...@nbd.name> writes:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> With Toke's ath9k txq patch I've noticed a pretty nasty performance
>>> regression when running local iperf on an AP (running the txq stuff) to
>>> a wireless client.
>>>
>>> Here's some things that I found:
>>> - when I use only one TCP stream I get around 90-110 Mbit/s
>>> - when running multiple TCP streams, I get only 35-40 Mbit/s total
>>> - fairness between TCP streams looks completely fine
>>> - there's no big queue buildup, the code never actually drops any packets
>>> - if I put a hack in the fq code to force the hash to a constant value
>>> (effectively disabling fq without disabling codel), the problem
>>> disappears and even multiple streams get proper performance.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if you have any ideas.
>>
>> Hmm, I see two TCP streams get about the same aggregate throughput as
>> one, both when started from the AP and when started one hop away.
>> However, do see TCP flows take a while to ramp up when started from the
>> AP - a short test gets ~70Mbps when run from one hop away and ~50Mbps
>> when run from the AP. how long are you running the tests for?
>>
>> (I seem to recall the ramp-up issue to be there pre-patch as well,
>> though).
> 
> The original ath10k code had a "swag" at hooking in an estimator from
> rate control.
> With minstrel in play that can be done better in the ath9k.
> 
>> As for why this would happen... There could be a bug in the dequeue code
>> somewhere, but since you get better performance from sticking everything
>> into one queue, my best guess would be that the client is choking on the
>> interleaved packets? I.e. expending more CPU when it can't stick
>> subsequent packets into the same TCP flow?
> 
> I share this concern.
> 
> The quantum is? I am not opposed to a larger quantum (2 full size
> packets = 3028 in this case?).
I also agree with increasing quantum, however that did not make any
difference in my tests.

- Felix

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to