On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 2:35 AM John-Mark Gurney <jmg_at_funkthat.com> wrote: > Ganbold Tsagaankhuu wrote this message on Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 18:29 +0800: > > On Mon, Jul 27, 2020 at 5:14 AM John-Mark Gurney <jmg_at_funkthat.com> > wrote: > > > > > Ganbold Tsagaankhuu wrote this message on Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 11:05 > +0800: > > > > On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 7:13 AM John-Mark Gurney <jmg_at_funkthat.com> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > > > > > I'd like people who have ure (RealTek) based USB devices to test > > > > > review D25809[0]. > > > > > > > > > > This update adds support for: > > > > > - HW VLAN tagging > > > > > - HW checksum offload for IPv4 and IPv6 > > > > > - tx and rx aggreegation (for full gige speeds) > > > > > - multiple transactions > > > > > > > > > > In my testing, I am able to get 900-950Mbps depending upon > > > > > TCP or UDP, which is a significant improvement over the previous > > > > > 91Mbps (~8kint/sec*1500bytes/packet*1packet/int). > > > > > > > > Does performance improve for if_ure device on USB2? > > > > I will try to test it in a couple of days on NanoPI R1 and R1S > boards. > > > > > > Yes, it should. > > > > > > I never tested the before driver on USB2, but I'm now able to get > > > 211Mbps TX and 190Mbps RX TCP, and 227Mbps TX and 225Mbps RX UDP. > > > > > > I believe it is likely that the same 91Mbps speed limit applied to > > > USB2 as well. > > > > Couldn't find your iperf test scripts and I tested only tcp: > > My test script isn't performance, just features, and I'm thinking about > how/where to publish it... > > You can also test UDP using -u w/ iperf3 and adjust the bandwidth w/ > -b 300m (or other Mbps)... > > > root_at_nanopi-r1s-h5:~ # iperf3 -c 192.168.111.1 > > Connecting to host 192.168.111.1, port 5201 > > [ 5] local 192.168.111.10 port 28569 connected to 192.168.111.1 port > 5201 > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd > > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 27.4 MBytes 230 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 27.7 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 27.7 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 27.7 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 27.6 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 95.4 KBytes > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 276 MBytes 232 Mbits/sec 0 > sender > > [ 5] 0.00-10.79 sec 276 MBytes 215 Mbits/sec > > receiver > > > > iperf Done. > > root_at_nanopi-r1s-h5:~ # iperf3 -c 192.168.111.1 -R > > Connecting to host 192.168.111.1, port 5201 > > Reverse mode, remote host 192.168.111.1 is sending > > [ 5] local 192.168.111.10 port 29384 connected to 192.168.111.1 port > 5201 > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate > > [ 5] 0.00-1.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 1.00-2.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 2.00-3.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 4.00-5.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 5.00-6.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 6.00-7.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 7.00-8.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 8.00-9.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec > > [ 5] 9.00-10.00 sec 12.1 MBytes 102 Mbits/sec > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > > [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr > > [ 5] 0.00-11.25 sec 121 MBytes 90.3 Mbits/sec 2539 > > sender > > [ 5] 0.00-10.00 sec 121 MBytes 101 Mbits/sec > > receiver > > > > iperf Done. > > root_at_nanopi-r1s-h5:~ # sysctl -a | grep cpu.0.freq > > dev.cpu.0.freq_levels: 1248/-1 1008/-1 816/-1 624/-1 480/-1 > > dev.cpu.0.freq: 1248 > > Hmmm... The reverse seems slow, but I can't think of why it'd be that > slow though. When I did my tests on the USB2 ports, both directions > were about the same speed... > > Thanks for the test! Great to hear things are working... > When can you commit it? thanks, Ganbold > > -- > John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 > > "All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not." >Received on Wed Aug 19 2020 - 06:27:33 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:24 UTC