All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
To: Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: Set sk_pacing_shift to 6 for 11AC WiFi chips
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 13:45:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zhye1aqg.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1532589677-16428-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org>

Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org> writes:

> Upstream kernel has an interface to help adjust sk_pacing_shift to help
> improve TCP UL throughput.
> The sk_pacing_shift is 8 in mac80211, this is based on test with 11N
> WiFi chips with ath9k. For QCA6174/QCA9377 PCI 11AC chips, the 11AC
> VHT80 TCP UL throughput testing result shows 6 is the optimal.
> Overwrite the sk_pacing_shift to 6 in ath10k driver.

When I tested this, a pacing shift of 8 was quite close to optimal as
well for ath10k. Why are you getting different results?

> Tested with QCA6174 PCI with firmware
> WLAN.RM.4.4.1-00109-QCARMSWPZ-1, but this will also affect QCA9377 PCI.
> It's not a regression with new firmware releases.
>
> There have 2 test result of different settings:
>
> ARM CPU based device with QCA6174A PCI with different
> sk_pacing_shift:
>
>  sk_pacing_shift  throughput(Mbps)             CPU utilization
>          6            500(-P5)      ~75% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~14%idle
>          7            454(-P5)      ~80% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~4%idle
>          8               288        ~90% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~35%idle
>          9              ~200        ~92% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~50%idle

Your tests do not include latency values; please try running a test that
also measures latency. The tcp_nup test in Flent (https://flent.org)
will do that, for instance. Also, is this a single TCP flow?

-Toke

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@toke.dk>
To: Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org>,
	ath10k@lists.infradead.org, johannes@sipsolutions.net
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: Set sk_pacing_shift to 6 for 11AC WiFi chips
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 13:45:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87zhye1aqg.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1532589677-16428-3-git-send-email-wgong@codeaurora.org>

Wen Gong <wgong@codeaurora.org> writes:

> Upstream kernel has an interface to help adjust sk_pacing_shift to help
> improve TCP UL throughput.
> The sk_pacing_shift is 8 in mac80211, this is based on test with 11N
> WiFi chips with ath9k. For QCA6174/QCA9377 PCI 11AC chips, the 11AC
> VHT80 TCP UL throughput testing result shows 6 is the optimal.
> Overwrite the sk_pacing_shift to 6 in ath10k driver.

When I tested this, a pacing shift of 8 was quite close to optimal as
well for ath10k. Why are you getting different results?

> Tested with QCA6174 PCI with firmware
> WLAN.RM.4.4.1-00109-QCARMSWPZ-1, but this will also affect QCA9377 PCI.
> It's not a regression with new firmware releases.
>
> There have 2 test result of different settings:
>
> ARM CPU based device with QCA6174A PCI with different
> sk_pacing_shift:
>
>  sk_pacing_shift  throughput(Mbps)             CPU utilization
>          6            500(-P5)      ~75% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~14%idle
>          7            454(-P5)      ~80% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~4%idle
>          8               288        ~90% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~35%idle
>          9              ~200        ~92% idle, Focus on CPU1: ~50%idle

Your tests do not include latency values; please try running a test that
also measures latency. The tcp_nup test in Flent (https://flent.org)
will do that, for instance. Also, is this a single TCP flow?

-Toke

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

  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-26 13:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-26  7:21 [PATCH 0/2] Change sk_pacing_shift in ieee80211_hw for best tx throughput Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:21 ` Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:21 ` [PATCH 1/2] mac80211: Save sk_pacing_shift to ieee80211_hw Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:21   ` Wen Gong
2018-07-26 14:52   ` kbuild test robot
2018-07-26 14:52     ` kbuild test robot
2018-07-27  8:35     ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27  8:35       ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27  9:30       ` Kalle Valo
2018-07-27  9:30         ` Kalle Valo
2018-07-26  7:21 ` [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: Set sk_pacing_shift to 6 for 11AC WiFi chips Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:21   ` Wen Gong
2018-07-26 11:45   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2018-07-26 11:45     ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-07-26 13:02     ` Michał Kazior
2018-07-26 13:02       ` Michał Kazior
2018-07-27  9:39       ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27  9:39         ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27 12:33         ` Michał Kazior
2018-07-27 12:33           ` Michał Kazior
2018-07-27  9:29     ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27  9:29       ` Wen Gong
2018-07-27 20:06       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2018-07-27 20:06         ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-07-26  7:16 [PATCH 0/2] Change sk_pacing_shift in ieee80211_hw for best tx throughput Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] ath10k: Set sk_pacing_shift to 6 for 11AC WiFi chips Wen Gong
2018-07-26  7:16   ` Wen Gong

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87zhye1aqg.fsf@toke.dk \
    --to=toke@toke.dk \
    --cc=ath10k@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wgong@codeaurora.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.