On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 11:18:39 AM Ben Greear wrote: > On 08/14/2014 10:09 AM, Ben Greear wrote: > > On 08/14/2014 05:39 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote: > >> On Tuesday, August 12, 2014 11:34:59 AM Ben Greear wrote: > >>> > >>> Without encryption, I see download rate of around 400 - 420Mbps. > >>> > >>> So, your patch looks like a good improvement to me, and I'll be > >>> happy to test further patches if you happen to do those assembler > >>> optimizations you talk about above. > >> > >> Maybe, that will depend on what the results for: "wpa2, *HW*-crypt, > >> download, udp" are. > > > > I'll do that test sometime soon and post the results. > > I ran that today, and I get about the same throughput with hw-crypt or > sw-crypt (350-355Mbps UDP download goodput). > > I still see 400+Mbps with Open authentication. > > So, maybe the bottleneck now is elsewhere... Can you rule out that the "udp generator" (either the application or the hardware) is now the bottleneck for this test? [Does the datasheet mention the throughput of the hw-crypto? Or do you know someone at QCA which can tell you if the hardware is filling up the aggregates with additional padding to meet the MPDU start spacing] I'll look into the assembler implementation of aes-ccm. But I'm afraid that this won't increase the throughput (and only decrease the load on the CPU a bit). Also, just for fun: what goodput can you achieve over gbit ethernet? [Because ethernet is also affected by filtering, bridging, pcie-throughput... if it is setup in the same way so you could rule out that iptables, its friends or the pcie-port is a bottleneck]. Regards Christian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
