From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8271364 for ; Wed, 10 May 2023 09:00:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from sender4-op-o10.zoho.com (sender4-op-o10.zoho.com [136.143.188.10]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C664330CF for ; Wed, 10 May 2023 02:00:04 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1683709182; cv=none; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; b=d1WNsFPlQ6GHgkwA5ctN7soCVyXHIWnY/ETsMS33vvdeyQucGSCgfEL2IkDax/KCTh57czS+kxgkniJbVYBGoCTXTV+evS/d0g2THXKmZJb4UOgwEAHH2+PTrh0YMNcwKhDD4eXuB0j0i2pbtipXjV/ht7I7i7NEgd7X6gJqHWE= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=zohomail.com; s=zohoarc; t=1683709182; h=Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:From:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Message-ID:References:Subject:To; bh=fpIFZt0++dJMC8JRp95nIMa+gja2vGfwUkbr5rO1DzY=; b=SzvpYLSU1S0vHQFfBAcIl8ZZDKKX/5Mv1N5Po4ErkkfRXYh2FfnJj/MkcRPyWDRIt1OrgaqbXIAi3Bs1BMobI4d8SkRRu6TrDy/fD2Z1OkgF1qgbS2KZ1TDdq5Kvm6pMpW1tu9MUHTTIOtH9VMXLFJxBDEkAaJx/W7oXkV4qzEs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.zohomail.com; dkim=pass header.i=arinc9.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arinc.unal@arinc9.com; dmarc=pass header.from= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1683709182; s=zmail; d=arinc9.com; i=arinc.unal@arinc9.com; h=Message-ID:Date:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:Subject:From:From:To:To:Cc:Cc:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:Reply-To; bh=fpIFZt0++dJMC8JRp95nIMa+gja2vGfwUkbr5rO1DzY=; b=LLY1gNXgV9i047XU8IR62QU5QgL3smi8KIJQBM9OJmXiY08+JTGs5lxJqXOPyzrc qgFB4pWom6u0F2m2dH7sORVTRKEyifX7wEhOiWNFgykaewXf0Q6iRh/eByrOH8qBkQB Nkq4TSJPMxe5sUnIJGZKHmNEG3dEqzIXQtjud00I= Received: from [10.1.111.147] (185.242.250.116-ip.operadors.cat [185.242.250.116]) by mx.zohomail.com with SMTPS id 1683709180717645.9189569516909; Wed, 10 May 2023 01:59:40 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <21ce3015-b379-056c-e5ca-8763c58c6553@arinc9.com> Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 10:59:36 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.9.0 Subject: Re: MT7530 bug, forward broadcast and unknown frames to the correct CPU port Content-Language: en-US From: =?UTF-8?B?QXLEsW7DpyDDnE5BTA==?= To: Daniel Golle , Vladimir Oltean Cc: DENG Qingfang , Greg Ungerer , Richard van Schagen , Richard van Schagen , Frank Wunderlich , mithat.guner@xeront.com, erkin.bozoglu@xeront.com, bartel.eerdekens@constell8.be, netdev References: <8a955c34-5724-af9d-d828-a8786bcc08b0@arinc9.com> <20230426205450.kez5m5jr4xch7hql@skbuf> <0183eb91-8517-f40f-c2bb-b229e45d6fa5@arinc9.com> <8d6a46a7-a769-4532-dd44-f230b705a675@arinc9.com> <8d6a46a7-a769-4532-dd44-f230b705a675@arinc9.com> <20230429173522.tqd7izelbhr4rvqz@skbuf> <680eea9a-e719-bbb1-0c7c-1b843ed2afcd@arinc9.com> <20230429185657.jrpcxoqwr5tcyt54@skbuf> <20230501100930.eemwoxmwh7oenhvb@skbuf> <839003bf-477e-9c91-3a98-08f8ca869276@arinc9.com> In-Reply-To: <839003bf-477e-9c91-3a98-08f8ca869276@arinc9.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-ZohoMailClient: External X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net On 1.05.2023 12:43, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: > On 1.05.2023 13:31, Daniel Golle wrote: >> On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 01:09:30PM +0300, Vladimir Oltean wrote: >>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 10:52:12PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: >>>> On 29.04.2023 21:56, Vladimir Oltean wrote: >>>>> On Sat, Apr 29, 2023 at 09:39:41PM +0300, Arınç ÜNAL wrote: >>>>>> Are you fine with the preferred port patch now that I mentioned >>>>>> port 6 >>>>>> would be preferred for MT7531BE since it's got 2.5G whilst port 5 has >>>>>> got 1G? Would you like to submit it or leave it to me to send the >>>>>> diff >>>>>> above and this? >>>>> >>>>> No, please tell me: what real life difference would it make to a user >>>>> who doesn't care to analyze which CPU port is used? >>>> >>>> They would get 2.5 Gbps download/upload bandwidth in total to the CPU, >>>> instead of 1 Gbps. 3 computers connected to 3 switch ports would >>>> each get >>>> 833 Mbps download/upload speed to/from the CPU instead of 333 Mbps. >>> >>> In theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they aren't. >>> Are you able to obtain 833 Mbps concurrently over 3 user ports? >> >> Probably the 2.5 GBit/s won't saturate, but I do manage to get more >> than 1 Gbit/s total (using the hardware flow offloading capability to >> NAT-route WAN<->LAN and simultanously have a WiFi client access a NAS >> device which also connects to a LAN port. I use MT7915E+MT7975D mPCIe >> module with BPi-R2) >> >> Using PHY muxing to directly map the WAN port to GMAC2 is also an >> option, but would be limiting the bandwidth for those users who just >> want all 5 ports to be bridged. Hence I do agree with Arınç that the >> best would be to use the TRGMII link on GMAC1 for the 4 WAN ports and >> prefer using RGMII link on GMAC2 for the WAN port, but keep using DSA. > > You seem to be rather talking about MT7530 while I think preferring port 6 > would benefit MT7531BE the most. > > Can you test the actual speed with SGMII on MT7531? Route between two > ports and > do a bidirectional iperf3 speed test. > > SGMII should at least provide you with 2 Gbps bandwidth in total in a > router-on-a-stick scenario which is the current situation until the > changing > DSA conduit support is added. > > If we were to use port 5, download and upload speed would be capped at 500 > Mbps. With SGMII you should get 1000 Mbps on each. I tested this on Daniel's Banana Pi BPI-R3 which has got an MT7531AE switch. I can confirm I get more than 500 Mbps for RX and TX on a bidirectional speed test. [SUM][RX-S] 0.00-18.00 sec 1.50 GBytes 715 Mbits/sec receiver [SUM][TX-S] 0.00-18.00 sec 1.55 GBytes 742 Mbits/sec 6996 sender The test was run between two computers on different networks, 192.168.1.0/24 and 192.168.2.0/24, both computers had static routes to reach each other. I tried iperf3 as the server and client on both computers with similar results. This concludes preferring port 6 is practically beneficial for MT7531BE. Arınç