Ok respostando um teste bem completo do nanopi r4s quanto a desempenho de SQM:
Did some SQM testing with iperf3 using 3 different builds:
- All tests done with cake / piece_of_cake set to 1Gb up/down
- Stock build: 1.8 / 1.4ghz, r8169 driver
- OC build: 2.2 / 1.8ghz, r8169 driver
- r8168 build: 2.2 / 1.8ghz, r8168 driver
//////// Default IRQ and queue affinity //////////
Stock build:
- egress: 935
- ingress: 917
- bidirectional: 898 / 750
OC + r8169 build:
- egress: 940
- ingress: 916
- bidirectional: 890 / 800
OC + r8168 build:
- egress: 935
- ingress: 917
- bidirectional: 890 / 790
//////// IRQs and queues on A53 cores only //////////
Stock build:
- egress: 940
- ingress: 819
- bidirectional: 884 / 710
OC + r8169 build:
- egress: 940
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 890 / 690
OC + r8168 build:
- egress: 941
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 877 / 715
//////// IRQs and queues on A72 cores only //////////
Stock build:
- egress: 936
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 902 / 776
OC + r8169 build:
- egress: 934
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 910 / 835
OC + r8168 build:
- egress: 932
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 910 / 858
//////// IRQs on A72 cores, queues on A53 cores //////////
Stock build:
- egress: 936
- ingress: 885
- bidirectional: 882 / 655
OC + r8169 build:
- egress: 934
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 884 / 680
OC + r8168 build:
- egress: 932
- ingress: 910
- bidirectional: 874 / 680
//////// IRQs on A53 cores, queues on A72 cores //////////
Stock build:
- egress: 940
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 875 / 899
OC + r8169 build:
- egress: 940
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 887 / 888
OC + r8168 build:
- egress: 939
- ingress: 920
- bidirectional: 843 / 902
////// TAKEAWAYS
- Any of the cores seem to be able to handle gigabit in either direction. However when you put the queues on A53 cores and run a bidirectional test, the A53 cores struggle to keep up and drop to around 880 / 700 Mb
- When you put queues on the A72 cores, they can almost keep up with a full gigabit bidirectional load (almost 900 both ways)
- Overall the best result I got was by putting the IRQs on the A53 cores and queues on the A72 cores.
- The overclock and r8168 driver didn't seem to matter a whole lot. Most of the results on all the builds were within the variability between runs.
- I would say the overclock is not worth it unless you need it for docker / other stuff.
- The ingress speeds on all tests were somewhat unstable. Speeds were around 940Mb for the most part but would drop to around 750 about every 5 seconds, bringing the average down to around 920Mb.
- I would call this device borderline for a symmetrical gigabit connection. I had to drop SQM to 850Mb up/down to get stable bidirectional performance. Asymmetrical is more doable and I managed to get stable speeds at 1000 / 700.
Testes feito pelo
walmartshopper no forum do openwrt depois de uma discussão que eu iniciei com ele quanto a questão de LB + SQM no nano:
Portanto o que descobrimos é que o nano consegue sim fazer SQM de conexão de 1 Gigabit, porém, não 1 Gigabit simétrico ao mesmo tempo, ou seja, fazer SQM ao mesmo tempo de um download e um upload indo a velocidade de 1 Gigabit/s, porem, colocando as queues nos cores A72 e irq nos a53 ele quase consegue isso chegando a uma velocidade de uns 900 Mb/s fazendo SQM tanto no download como no upload ao mesmo tempo.
OBS:
Ele se refere a stock build, quando vc pega uma imagem do master do openwrt e usa ela ai o clock é 1.8 ghz nos núcleos a72 + 1.4g hz nos núcleos a53, porém, se vc usa openwrt que a friendly arm criou, então esses clocks por padrão sobem para 2.0 ghz nos a72 e 1.5 ghz nos a53.
www.mercadolivre.com.br
github.com
forum.openwrt.org
