Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com ([74.125.82.45]:33677 "EHLO mail-wm0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753828AbcGSNOB convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Jul 2016 09:14:01 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f45.google.com with SMTP id r190so26112286wmr.0 for ; Tue, 19 Jul 2016 06:14:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <11fa6d16-21e2-2169-8d18-940f6dc11dca@nbd.name> References: <11fa6d16-21e2-2169-8d18-940f6dc11dca@nbd.name> From: Michal Kazior Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2016 15:13:58 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20160719_151406_430623_A504EECB) Subject: Re: TCP performance regression in mac80211 triggered by the fq code To: Felix Fietkau Cc: linux-wireless , =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12 July 2016 at 12:09, Felix Fietkau wrote: > Hi, > > With Toke's ath9k txq patch I've noticed a pretty nasty performance > regression when running local iperf on an AP (running the txq stuff) to > a wireless client. > > Here's some things that I found: > - when I use only one TCP stream I get around 90-110 Mbit/s > - when running multiple TCP streams, I get only 35-40 Mbit/s total What is the baseline here (i.e. without fq/txq stuff)? Is it ~100mbps? Did you try running multiple streams, each on separate tids (matching the same AC perhaps) or different clients? Michał