Hi Eric, This compares Cubic with BBR with 4.13-rc2 (which has a few new commits to bbr.c):
wlan0: <BROADCAST,MULTICAST,UP,LOWER_UP> mtu 1500 qdisc mq state UP mode DORMANT group default qlen 1000 $ cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_congestion_control cubic $ iperf3 -c Connecting to host , port 5201 [ 4] local port 35242 connected to port 5201 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 2.34 MBytes 19.6 Mbits/sec 0 26.9 KBytes [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 2.45 MBytes 20.6 Mbits/sec 0 26.9 KBytes [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 2.36 MBytes 19.8 Mbits/sec 0 26.9 KBytes [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 2.43 MBytes 20.4 Mbits/sec 0 26.9 KBytes [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 2.42 MBytes 20.3 Mbits/sec 0 26.9 KBytes [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 2.33 MBytes 19.5 Mbits/sec 0 29.7 KBytes [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 2.48 MBytes 20.8 Mbits/sec 0 29.7 KBytes [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 2.27 MBytes 19.1 Mbits/sec 0 29.7 KBytes [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 2.45 MBytes 20.6 Mbits/sec 0 29.7 KBytes [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 2.43 MBytes 20.4 Mbits/sec 0 29.7 KBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 24.0 MBytes 20.1 Mbits/sec 0 sender [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 23.9 MBytes 20.1 Mbits/sec receiver $ echo bbr > /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_congestion_control $ iperf3 -c Connecting to host , port 5201 [ 4] local port 35246 connected to port 5201 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd [ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 1.69 MBytes 14.2 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 1.59 MBytes 13.4 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 1.43 MBytes 12.0 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 1.63 MBytes 13.6 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 1.59 MBytes 13.4 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.50 MBytes 12.6 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 1.59 MBytes 13.3 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 1.59 MBytes 13.3 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 1.60 MBytes 13.4 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes [ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 1.63 MBytes 13.6 Mbits/sec 0 8.48 KBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 15.8 MBytes 13.3 Mbits/sec 0 sender [ 4] 0.00-10.00 sec 15.8 MBytes 13.2 Mbits/sec receiver Hope that helps. Taking a step back, the original issue for me here is that using a MacBook Air at the same location and with the same BSSID throughput (for TCP is about 100Mbits/sec). Of course it's a different phy and stack but we should be able to get much better throughput from the Atheros phy, driver and TCP stack in this scenario without very much tuning. Patching tcp_output.c as above did make a significant difference (though not quite making up the full difference) but it looks like using BBR on the client doesn't. Are you thinking the solution lies down the path of using BBR? Could you tell what you would expect to see results-wise in using BBR over others in this scenario? Thanks! Appreciate your input to this! -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1670041 Title: Poor performance of Atheros QCA6174 802.11ac (rev 32) (Killer Wireless 1535) To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1670041/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
