garywang
(gary)
September 11, 2017, 12:27pm
1
Below is the performance of IP forwarding over GMACs(eth0 and eth1):
Single direction flow
Bidirection flow
Statistics on R2 board:
------------------
root@LEDE:/proc/irq/70# ifconfig
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr EE:86:59:C8:EB:3A
inet addr:192.168.1.1 Bcast:192.168.1.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::ec86:59ff:fec8:eb3a/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:26822854 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:37617944 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:35021520367 (32.6 GiB) TX bytes:49849909918 (46.4 GiB)
Interrupt:68
eth1 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr 8E:3B:FE:FC:EA:BE
inet addr:192.168.10.1 Bcast:192.168.10.255 Mask:255.255.255.0
inet6 addr: fe80::8c3b:feff:fefc:eabe/64 Scope:Link
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:37621811 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:26821988 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:49699772484 (46.2 GiB) TX bytes:35127932237 (32.7 GiB)
Interrupt:68
user do some test for 2.4G & 5.8G,for reference only
5.8G test:
2.4G test:
Impressive!
Does it use HW NAT in tests?
Just perfect for GPON
Best regards,
Karol
A simple idea to check if HWNAT is used:
cat /proc/interrupts
And check if network interrupts is rapidly increased during the test.
Besides, could you show a full result of ifconfig -a
and swconfig dev {SwitchName} show
if possible? Just curious about it.
Please, show us also CPUs usage during tests.
garywang
(gary)
September 11, 2017, 2:25pm
5
Don’t use HW NAT, more log is attached.a.log (6.4 KB)
When test the performance, it will take 20% usage of CPU. And if two ethernet interrupts are assigned to different cpu(1 and 2), will get better performance than both are on cpu0
Ok, very nice.
I’m curious how performance (throughput and CPUs usage) would be affected by using HW NAT.
Are You able to check it?
Could You also make test with 1518B, 512B and 64B packet size? Then performance could be compared to other platforms.
garywang
(gary)
September 12, 2017, 12:43am
7
Hi Karol
The HW NAT isn’t supported yet, we need a plan for it, when it’s avaiable, I will show you the test result.
Ok, thanks!
Could You make test for 1518B, 512B and 64B packet size without HW NAT (as is now)?
How does the hardware NAT look like it’s gonna be? And when? Any image that doesn’t come with X?
garywang
(gary)
September 25, 2017, 10:26am
10
We are trying to support HNAT based on LEDE, will let you know when it’s available.
frank-w
(Frank W.)
September 25, 2017, 2:32pm
11
do you include it to kernel on github if its working?
garywang
(gary)
September 29, 2017, 12:06pm
12
@garywang @Super_De_Algar @Karol_Bizewski
Below is the performance of IP forwarding based on Hardware NAT:
The source code is coming soon, but I don’t have time to test brenchmark for 64byte, 512 byte, and 1024 byte recently, and looks like the test result is not good as we expected,
garywang
(gary)
September 29, 2017, 1:52pm
13
After changing the test PC-s, the performance is closed to line rate(1Gbps) in bidirection
see more information in below link:
Source code
The source code is at: https://github.com/garywangcn/bpi-r2_lede
Please clone the code to local and checkout the code from branch bpi-r2-on-lede-v1.
Build
Follow the LEDE building instruction to compile the lede system, the target system is MediaTek Ralink ARM, the config file is attached.
Image
Please download the image I built from below link
http://pan.baidu.com/s/1nuXqAVJ
Boot with LEDE image
Step 1: Please program LEDE 2017-09-08 image to emmc by following http://forum.banan…
What is that exe thing? DOS or something? That looks like out of another century!
moore
(moore liu)
October 20, 2017, 10:44pm
15
garywang
(gary)
October 22, 2017, 5:47am
16
The iperf…exe is the tool iperf which is an executable file under DOS. I will share it for you if you need.
Well it’s not a DOS program - it’s a Windows console program. Performance looks very promising!