Did a little playing with the IRQ's... I noticed that everything was basically pulling from CPU0. irqbalance didn't seem to do anything, so I manually moved some of them around based on feedback from the Xiaomi AX3600 thread since the hardware is extremely comparable.
Below you will see what I added to the startup script, and what the outcome was. Previously everything was on CPU0. Definitely balances the load and I notice less latency as well. Processor frequencies ramp up evenly (generally speaking) across the CPUs now also. Next I may play with the processor frequencies and responsiveness to see if I can further accelerate. If anyone has any feedback or requests on what I've done, let me know!
Please keep us updated with your final results and instruction on how to apply it, Thank you,
Just a quick question: do you have any test result by changing software /hardware flow offloading and packet steering? (possibly no effect with hardware offloading as this hardware does not support it)
I do not at present - no. My previous dealings with both of those has tended to be less than optimal, but that was with @ACwifidude NSS builds for the R7800. I will test with this router as time proceeds.
You surely know, that this just the hex-encoded client IP: 192.168.10.10
Looks like there is a bootfile parameter which maybe would control the TFTP filename:
root@DL-WRX36-7DE ~ # strings /dev/mtd15 | grep boot | grep file
** No boot file defined **
No valid device tree binary found - please append one to U-Boot binary, use u-boot-dtb.bin or define CONFIG_OF_EMBED. For sandbox, use -d <file.dtb>
*** Warning: no boot file name; using '%s'
By the way the U-Boot won't enter automatically to this TFTP recovery if one keeps pushing the RESET or the WPS button while powering on the device?
I've noticed this as well - it stays at 1ghz the vast majority of the time and even causes processor usage spikes up to 40% sometimes during minuscule tasks. I'm going to test with both ondemand and performance to see how they compare. With my R7800's I always ran performance because the power consumption differences were so negligible and the router temps only increased a degree or two. Curious how this will respond as well. I know that many stock firmware's don't allow so many frequencies to be selected, but rather two or three at most and most stock firmware have very aggressive up sampling as well.
I described it earlier: used root+ssh to install OpenWrt in memory then by using ubi. All went ok and I had luci installed. Then upgraded to a new snapshot via UI and rebooted. It was stuck on purple led no matter what I tried. I had to disassemble the unit and hook up to the console port. Was able to go though steps all the way this time. A bit hesitant to upgrade again though
Its a minor issue though. The biggest one is the inability to use 160mhz channels normally and missing upper 5ghz channels. I dunno why people turn other way from this problem in a supposedly 'recommended' WiFi router.
Just for comparison. My phicomm K3 which I got for 40 bucks shipped 3 years ago is based on (shunned) Broadcom and still works perfectly with OpenWrt since 19.x (after tweaks) - irqbalance works, 1gbps nat works, 3(!) 160mhz channels work, no hardcoded regdb. Uptime is till next power loss.
I hoped for upgrade to ax (no real need, just curiosity, I guess) but oh well...