ath10k performance, master branch from 20160407

[Roman Yeryomin]

Latest backports (compat-wireless) released (20160110) has codel
enabled (CPTCFG_NET_SCH_FQ_CODEL=y) and there are no openwrt patches
or special configuration for codel. And it runs ok.
How old commit do you want me to try?

Regards,
Roman

On 8 April 2016 at 19:41, Manoharan, Rajkumar <rmanohar at qti.qualcomm.com> wrote:
> 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.lists at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 9:30 PM
> To: Manoharan, Rajkumar
> Cc: ath10k at 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 <rmanohar at 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-bounces at lists.infradead.org> on behalf of Roman Yeryomin <leroi.lists at gmail.com>
>> Sent: Friday, April 8, 2016 8:14 PM
>> To: ath10k at 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 at lists.infradead.org
>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k