1932

The ASRock g10 and TP-Link Archer c2600 share the very same wireless chipset (QCA9980, QCA9880-BR4A for 2.4 GHz is an odd choice, but also common, e.g. archer c7 v2+ and BT HomeHub 5 Type A), but don't appear to have any problems in that regard (I can at least attest that for the g10 myself). If there is indeed a problem or a regression, it needs to be solved in current code, sticking to an abandoned code base (or even doing active development on an otherwise EOLed one) is not part of a solution.

1933

I don’t have a 7500v2 but several people above report good speeds. If you have time you could save your current config and load a fresh 21.02 or 22.03 build. Run some quick tests with near defaults and depending on what you see - either stay or go back.

1934

I use the r7500v2 on "master" builds (no NSS) with the ath10k-ct driver/firmware. On 5 GHz wifi I've seen netperf's in the 500+Mbps range. I'm pretty sure I can go higher. On 2.4 GHz, I've seen ~100Mbps+. Both rates are likely client limited - I might be able to go higher on 2.4 GHz by tuning my settings - I don't bother.

EDIT: 10 s netperf run just now, client -> AP with direct line of site to AP (~3 m away) on channel 36, 80 MHz width.

Recv   Send    Send                          
Socket Socket  Message  Elapsed              
Size   Size    Size     Time     Throughput  
bytes  bytes   bytes    secs.    10^6bits/sec  

131072 131072 131072    10.02     580.00

EDIT 2: If I have more than one client trying to do a simultaneous netperf in the client -> AP direction when the clients don't have a line of site and are 15-20m away, all bets are off. It's terrible and I've spent a lot of time trying to figure out why. The only solution I've found so far is slow the clients down. ATF/AQL does help in the AP -> client direction (but for the r7500v2 you may need a patch for that).

2 Likes
1935

@anon98444528 @ACwifidude @slh

Just retested, my setup is using wifi as wwan and repeater, wwan max speed is +-330mbps

ath10k is the worst, even iperf inside my network is limitted to +-50mbps
ath10k-ct is not limiting in iperf (+-350mbps), but is limiting in speedtest.net or fast.com (+-70mbps).
openwrt19, is not limiting anything, speedtest.net or fast.com(+-200bmps).

any ideas? this happenned in both v21 and v22 versions.

1936

Not really.

If possible, try your v21 or v22 speed tests with a client wired to the AP. Also, try repeating the wireless speed test but ensure one and only one client is connected to the 5GHz band. My own observations are if more than one client is connected on the same wifi band, I can see significant variation in throughput even if the other clients are not doing much.

I gave up on the non ct ath10k (for qca9980) a long time ago.

The biggest difference I see between 19 and 21 or 22 is the kernel went from 4.14 to 5.4. Kernels 5.4+ are good for me in terms of overall stability (AP uptimes > 100+ days). However, during that transition is also when I noticed a degradation in "wifi quality." Unfortunately, about this time is when I think ATF/AQL was introduced (which is intended to improved "quality"). I can't (yet) pinpoint what the root cause is for the change in wifi behavior - it could just be a combination of how my family uses wifi now and changes in how I assess "quality."

FWIW I'm willing to trade off throughput for "quality" (i.e. low bufferbloat - stable video conferencing).

HTH

1937

wired speed test is ok (+-330)

my tests where using just one client already, but the router itself is the client of another router, maybe that triggers something.

i don't really have a problem with v19 throughput or latency, but i'll keep using v21 for a while just to see if I notice some kind of improvement

1938

A wireless bridge? If so, on the same wifi band (5GHz)?

1939

Yes, only using 5ghz

1940

Short term, I don't think there is much you can do. I'm guessing ditching the wireless bridge and connecting your AP via a wire is not an option you want.

For the purpose of a test, you could rearrange your AP's such that the r7500v2 is connected to your isp via wire, temporarily turn off the bridge, and test just using 5 GHz as an AP only. But this will only confirm that post v19, wifi throughput variation increases (I call it throughput jitter).

You could also try the v19 ath10k-ct firmware on v21 or v22. If there is an improvement with v19 ath10k-ct firmeware, you can ask for assistance from the ct dev but you will likely have to spend a fair amount of time working with them.

EDIT: you can also try disabling AQL on v21 or v22

echo 0 > /sys/kernel/debug/ieee80211/phy0/aql_enable
echo 0 > /sys/kernel/debug/ieee80211/phy1/aql_enable

REF

1 Like
1941

Speed tests with the router as the server or the client for iperf? Using the router as the iperf server or client will lead to inaccurate numbers when trying to test max 5ghz or max wired speeds. Instead test it with a wired computer as the iperf server and a 5ghz wireless client (iperf client).

Wireless bridges insert latency and is the biggest source of your performance degradation. Any way you can wire to the source?

1942

Already using a wired gigabit client as the server, disabling AQL made no perceivable difference.

After some time using v21 ath10k-ct , wifi started to behave slow in iperf (like ath10k)

I know about the issues of wireless bridge, but we are talking v19 bridge vs v21+ bridge, wiring is not possible in this case.

Thanks for all the help, but I'll keep v19 for a little more..

1 Like
1943

with the NON NSS versions do you get the same results?21.02, 20.02, etc.

1944

Yes, it's not related to NSS (sorry for hijacking the thread)

1945

If there is any way to fish a wire or move the access point so that you could fish a wire - it is well well well well worth it. I hired help and paid for less than 2 hours of electrician labor (tough to fish lines by yourself!) and I’m able to get full performance for all my APs. :sunglasses:

Best of luck!

2 Likes
1946

Is Master or 22.03 the "newest" build? It seems most people have clicked Master but I'm not sure which to use. Thanks!

Looks like maybe Master is newest and uses the updated kernel?

1947

This previous post has an explanation: Ipq806x NSS build (Netgear R7800 / TP-Link C2600 / Linksys EA8500) - #1897 by ACwifidude

1 Like
1948

@aamadorj post is spot on.

Master is always the most cutting edge “trunk”, followed by the 22.03 branch, and 21.02 branch.

I updated the naming scheme for all the links above so the click counts got reset a couple days ago. The click counts have been reset several times as I make sure the build has the latest stuff (click counts don’t matter). Go with the branch or trunk that best aligns with your goals - cutting edge vs more tried and true. There are pros and cons to both. I like cutting edge so I’m always on master.

2 Likes
1949

Cool. Thanks for the explanation and the builds.
Cutting edge is where I'll be. :grinning::muscle::crazy_face:

1950

Hi ACWifidude,

I am using your tree (openwrt-21.02-nss-qsdk10.0 branch rebased to OpenWrt upstream) to build my custom firmware for my R7800, but I currently encountering some issues with my custom build, and I want to figure out why and try to solve it. Any help is appreciated!

Issues encountered

  1. after flashing it, the kernel log is keep being spammed by the lines shown below[1].
  2. Wifi sometimes stops its transmission - it keeps connected but pinging and performing network operations does not work for a few seconds. Not sure if it is related to NSS, but I will post this anyway.
  3. Compared to non-NSS build, Wired Ethernet throughput is way lower (~800Mbps compared to 940Mbps) using iperf3. I tested it with a Raspberry Pi 4, server runs at the router side Have tested with another device, the router can now handle full gigabit with zero CPU.

What I am doing and have done for this router

  • I am using -ct driver (I have tested non-ct driver and firmware) and performance CPU governor (CPU maxed at 1725MHz).
  • I am using 5GHz WiFi for both WWAN and AP, not sure if the second issue is related to NSS. Tried disabling AQL but no effect.
  • I have tested your build from the git repo, and using both WWAN and AP on 5GHz, there is no issue and no repeating lines. I need the iptables-mod-tproxy package but it conflicts because the kernel does not like it, so I can not use your build for me.
  • With my build, I have enforced 800MHz NSS core frequency by echoing it and cated it (you can see the kernel logs[2]), but these lines keep spamming. I also disabled AQL but no effect whatsoever.

Notes

[1] the repeating lines:

[  183.669431] net_ratelimit: 24 callbacks suppressed
[  183.669435] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  183.706858] wlan0: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  183.790479] wlan0: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  183.838664] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  183.950342] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  184.043845] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  184.218573] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  184.262553] wlan0: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  184.327766] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED
[  184.327799] wlan0-1: NSS TX failed with error[8]: NSS_TX_FAILURE_NOT_ENABLED

Those lines keep spamming every 5 seconds.

[2] Kernel log uploaded to Gist
[3] My diffconfig to defconfig (./scripts/diffconfig.sh)
[4] diff of my diffconfig and yours (I enabled lots of packages so it is big)
[5] My complete config

1951

I think that's because NSS acceleration isn't enabled. You probably missed something in your custom build.
EDIT: I don't see ECM being loaded in your kernel log.