> On Jan 18, 2017, at 2:02 AM, Stefan Sperling <s...@stsp.name> wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 09:19:28AM +0100, Uwe Werler wrote:
>> On 16. Jan 17:46:48, Uwe Werler wrote:
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately the throughput is very low, only ~7 MBit. With mode 11g I get 
>>> ~16 MBit.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> zarathustra:~# tcpbench apu01
>>>  elapsed_ms          bytes         mbps   bwidth
>>>        1004         748272        5.962  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        5.962 Peak Mbps:        5.962 Avg Mbps:        5.962
>>>        2007         839664        6.697  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.697 Peak Mbps:        6.697 Avg Mbps:        6.697
>>>        3010         818244        6.533  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.533 Peak Mbps:        6.697 Avg Mbps:        6.533
>>>        4013         909636        7.255  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        7.255 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        7.255
>>>        5014         856800        6.848  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.848 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.848
>>>        6015         868224        6.946  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.946 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.946
>>>        7021         872508        6.945  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.945 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.945
>>>        8023         835380        6.670  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.670 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.670
>>>        9025         848232        6.779  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.779 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.779
>>>       10028         843948        6.731  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.731 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.731
>>>       11036         831096        6.596  100.00%
>>> Conn:   1 Mbps:        6.596 Peak Mbps:        7.255 Avg Mbps:        6.596
>>> 
>>> I'm now ready to test furhter.
>>> 
>> 
>> I tested yesterday with my Android phone (Galaxy S7) and got only ~4 MBit.
> 
> Thank you for providing these numbers.
> 
> I would like to note though that there are many factors determining the
> effective throughput of wifi, ranging from wifi hardware, across OS and
> driver code, to specific AP/client behaviour and environmental RF conditions.
> 
> So when you report a number, you help with establishing a picture of the
> overall range of throughput people are seeing. But a number does not tell
> anybody anything about why throughput is lower than expected in your case.
> So this number cannot be used to actually improve the driver.
> It is just a data point.
> 
> What would help a small bit is a direct comparison with Linux running on the
> same access point hardware in the exact same environment. That would indicate
> which performance levels could be reached in your environment if OpenBSD was
> optimally tuned. I assume Linux has reached optimal performance levels on
> this several years old hardware by now.
> 
> In my testing I have noticed that Intel clients send data much faster than
> athn APs/clients do. The AP is able to receive higher data rates than it
> is sending. I don't know why that is happening and under which conditions
> this is to be expected. But it points to a problem with the athn driver.
> Perhaps the hardware is not tuned towards the specific way in which our
> driver makes use of it.
> 
> For now, I am happy if your AP works without crashing.
> As mentioned in the driver's man page, our 11n support is still incomplete
> and a whole lot remains to be done.
> 

Thanks for all your work on 11n!

I just got my system set up with a wle200nx in hostap mode, with the OpenBSD 
snapshots from today. It’s working great so far, I’m able to consistently get 
13-16 megabits up and down with this config, enough to watch Netflix with no 
issues! Has anyone seen better than 16 megabit?

It’s proven robust so far, and I get much better signal all over my apartment 
whereas my old WRT610N had some trouble. I will compare with Linux as soon as I 
can, but realistically it’s working so well I don’t have a lot of motivation to 
change it. I can also report that I was changing modes and channels over ssh to 
test out different things, and didn’t have any crashes or issues.

WRT the receive vs send data rates, I observed that as well before I landed on 
this config. For me, 2.4 ghz 11n channels were getting 3-4 mbits to the AP, and 
11+ mbits down. I kind of assumed that, like many wireless chips, the receive 
is just better on this chip.

Ah, and all my testing was done with a late 2013 MacBook pro, and an iPhone 
6s+. As far as my environment, my MacBook detects ~37 networks around me, 
mostly on 2.4 ghz channels, about 1/3 on 5 ghz. I’m using chan 165 since none 
of the other APs seemed to pick it (they are maxing out at 161), so it seemed 
like a sensible choice for a static config.

If there is any other useful information I could report, I’d be happy to!

athn0 at pci4 dev 0 function 0 "Atheros AR9281" rev 0x01: apic 5 int 16
athn0: AR9280 rev 2 (2T2R), ROM rev 22, address re:da:ct:ed:00:00

# ifconfig athn0
athn0: flags=8943<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,PROMISC,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> mtu 1500
        lladdr re:da:ct:ed:00:00
        index 4 priority 4 llprio 3
        groups: wlan
        media: IEEE802.11 autoselect mode 11n hostap
        status: active
        ieee80211: nwid Redacted chan 165 bssid re:da:ct:ed:00:00 wpakey 
redacted wpaprotos wpa2 wpaakms psk wpaciphers ccmp wpagroupcipher ccmp

Peter

Reply via email to