From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-path: <ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org>
Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173])
 by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux))
 id 1WzSNM-0001eb-0Y
 for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:11:16 +0000
Message-ID: <53A994F7.6090707@candelatech.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2014 08:10:47 -0700
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: RE : Warning message in bridge mode
References: <1399565896-29791-1-git-send-email-greearb@candelatech.com>
 <5391E363.50907@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997902@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <53972984.8020303@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997906@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <53988C53.6030806@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997908@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <539A0C06.6050105@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F1099790A@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <539B2F21.3020609@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F1099790B@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <539F0393.1090009@candelatech.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F1099790D@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997914@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
 <53A89D2E.6010708@candelatech.com>,
 <E37BEAE7-CCA9-4C79-9F24-051E867FC0F6@gmail.com>
 <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997915@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
In-Reply-To: <EE97821C81277E459BEA5C6384C6F241012F10997915@srvexch01.SODIELEC.local>
List-Id: <ath10k.lists.infradead.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/options/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/ath10k/>
List-Post: <mailto:ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k>,
 <mailto:ath10k-request@lists.infradead.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: "ath10k" <ath10k-bounces@lists.infradead.org>
Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org
To: Vu Hai NGUYEN <vh.nguyen@actiasodielec.fr>, Bruno Antunes <baantunes@gmail.com>
Cc: Patrick CARNEIRO RODRIGUEZ <p.carneiro@actiasodielec.fr>, "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>

On 06/24/2014 12:39 AM, Vu Hai NGUYEN wrote:

> I was wrong, the only warning msg is "br0: received packet on wlan0.sta1 with own address as source address".
> And I have another question: When doing test with iperf, I always have rate from AP to STA higher than STA to AP
> (380Mbps vs 240 Mbps).This is normal too right? Cause before you told me that when you did the test with your
> own trafficgenerator, you can get 500+Mbps download, and about 400Mbps upload.

We have done some tests recently on E5 3.7Ghz systems (ie, top-end-ish server systems)
that can push 800+Mbps UDP, but can't recall if that is upload or download.

We need to re-run tests and publish the info.

Looks like host CPU is very important to higher-speeds with ath10k.  I did a perf top
months ago, and there was bad contention on a spinlock or two in ath10k driver, so that
is probably much of the performance problems we see.

Thanks,
Ben

-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com


_______________________________________________
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k