On 03/22/2018 08:21 PM, gary wrote:

Hi Ben,

Thank you for your reply.
My wireless driver is compat-wireless_2017-10-6, and kernel is 4.9.58.

The test result with your firmware:
Get throughput 1.13Gbps with 16 users.
And get almost 0 with 32 users.

Can you try an older kernel w/out backports, maybe my 4.13 or 4.9, or
some stock kernel that is a bit older?

https://github.com/greearb/linux-ct-4.9

Thanks,
Ben


By my observation, in one try, ath10k_htt_rx_tx_mode_switch_ind is invoked
only twice.
As a result, the ath10k driver can't get the latest num_push_allowed(always
zero).

Do you have any idea of it?

-----Original Message-----
From: ath10k [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ben
Greear
Sent: 2018年3月22日 0:31
To: gary; [email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [ath10k throughput] low throughput in multi-user mode


On 03/20/2018 06:44 PM, gary wrote:

Hi all,
I have run the throughput test on veriwave.(from Ethernet to wireless)
My AP suports 4*4, 11ac, mu-mimo.,wireless chip is QCA9984.
At first, the throughput is about 80Mbps only with 16 users, so I
force to return true in function ath10k_mac_tx_can_push().
As a result, when the user number is 1~16, the udp throughput is about
1.2Gbps ~1.4Gbps.
But when the user number is 32, the udp throughput is only 520Mbps.

So I try to substitute ath10k-firmware.
With firmware 10.4-3.4-0082 and above, the throughput is around 520Mbps.
But with firmware 10.4-3.4-0072, the throughput gets 1.1Gbps.

Do I miss something in configuration?
Any comment is appreciated.

What kernel version (or backports, if you are using that?) are you using?

And, I'd be curious how the latest ath10k-CT (beta) firmware compares if you
have time to try that:

http://www.candelatech.com/ath10k-10.4.php

At least in upload testing, we get better throughput with lots of virtual
stations if we tune the number of tx descriptors to be larger as that will
generate larger AMPDUs on air.

You might also check your rate-ctrl logic to make sure all of your stations
are using higher MCS rates.

Thanks,
Ben

--
Ben Greear <[email protected]>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k




_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k



--
Ben Greear <[email protected]>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

Reply via email to