So the build is working good on your router?
Newer version of mt76 dropped today. Among the commits to is this one. This is exciting because it is a step towards airtime fairness which should improve WiFi speeds and reduce latency. Fingers crossed
The transfer rate both ways are the half than the the build r8349.
Need more test.
I did some test.
iperf3 test over gbit eth<-->5GHz is about 220mbit, which is average than previous builds.
above or below average? I think you missed one word...
Good point, with a previous build (don't remember which one) the peak transfer rate was 250mbit.
However, yesterday I experienced some NAT slowness, download rate limited to 70-80 mbit. I have to go further with this investigation.
1 Like
Okay, here is a complete detailed Iperf3 testcase:
iperf3 -c 192.168.1.230 -p 5201 -t 34
4] local 192.168.1.123 port 56394 connected to 192.168.1.230 port 5201
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr Cwnd
[ 4] 0.00-1.00 sec 40.0 MBytes 336 Mbits/sec 0 932 KBytes
[ 4] 1.00-2.00 sec 25.2 MBytes 211 Mbits/sec 0 1.21 MBytes
[ 4] 2.00-3.00 sec 20.8 MBytes 175 Mbits/sec 0 1.55 MBytes
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 26.2 MBytes 220 Mbits/sec 0 1.81 MBytes
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 25.9 MBytes 217 Mbits/sec 0 2.09 MBytes
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 17.0 MBytes 142 Mbits/sec 0 2.42 MBytes
[ 4] 6.00-7.00 sec 18.5 MBytes 155 Mbits/sec 0 2.73 MBytes
[ 4] 7.00-8.00 sec 14.7 MBytes 124 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 8.00-9.00 sec 28.8 MBytes 242 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 9.00-10.00 sec 22.9 MBytes 192 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 10.00-11.00 sec 24.0 MBytes 201 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 11.00-12.00 sec 24.7 MBytes 207 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 12.00-13.00 sec 28.2 MBytes 236 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 13.00-14.00 sec 27.8 MBytes 233 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 14.00-15.00 sec 19.8 MBytes 166 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 15.00-16.00 sec 19.0 MBytes 159 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 16.00-17.00 sec 23.9 MBytes 200 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 17.00-18.00 sec 33.3 MBytes 279 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 18.00-19.00 sec 32.3 MBytes 271 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 19.00-20.00 sec 23.7 MBytes 198 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 20.00-21.00 sec 29.3 MBytes 246 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 21.00-22.00 sec 26.9 MBytes 226 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 22.00-23.00 sec 26.9 MBytes 225 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 23.00-24.00 sec 32.9 MBytes 276 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 24.00-25.00 sec 2.61 MBytes 21.9 Mbits/sec 1 1.41 KBytes
[ 4] 25.00-26.00 sec 20.8 MBytes 175 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 26.00-27.00 sec 21.0 MBytes 176 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 27.00-28.00 sec 21.6 MBytes 182 Mbits/sec 2 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 28.00-29.00 sec 22.5 MBytes 189 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 29.00-30.00 sec 14.5 MBytes 121 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 30.00-31.00 sec 13.8 MBytes 115 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 31.00-32.00 sec 28.7 MBytes 241 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 32.00-33.00 sec 20.6 MBytes 173 Mbits/sec 1 3.03 MBytes
[ 4] 33.00-34.00 sec 23.4 MBytes 196 Mbits/sec 0 3.03 MBytes
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth Retr
[ 4] 0.00-34.00 sec 802 MBytes 198 Mbits/sec 9 sender
[ 4] 0.00-34.00 sec 801 MBytes 198 Mbits/sec receiver
One question: how can I debug what is the bottleneck in my software?
I have 500mbit internet, and on cable I only receive 70-90 mbit. Enabling hw_nat doesn't make sense.
I only run ddns, upnp, every other thing like banip or adblock disabled.
One more thing: WireGuard page is empty, why?
So you get 200+ on wifi and 70-90 on cable ? Are you sure your network adapter is gigabit?
For 500mbit internet you'll need another router, you can look around for building your own with pfsense.
Wireguard is empty because it isn't setuped, you need to add interface, keys etc.
No, the bottleneck is in the NAT I think. I experience slowness between my router and PC.
With iperf3, when I test in gbit <--> 5ghz, I see the results like above. So there is a nat bottleneck somewhere.
This router can serve 500mbit internet, previous builds can. But somewhere there is a saturation. I disabled my torrent server, and my ISP can serve over 450mbit. Measured with speedtest.
Mod: found the problem: my router switched into 100mbit suddenly on WAN port. I checked the log, and it showed that there was some flapping (like plugin-out the cable). Contact error.
I reinstall the last r9559 factory image and the device now has excellent performance.
Any tip how to bluild new image with newer kernel ?
Setup the build environment as outlined in the OpenWRT wiki, use the config.seed as a base for your config and build it.
@all, I am still alive and there is a new build in testing. Been busy with my job and there have not been significant updates for our chipset. However, the current kernel should fix a few CVE and there is a new rngd which speedups the boot process (not that you are going to be using it much but still nice)
2 Likes
@All, a new build, r10127, is up in the OP.
Just made a new testing build, so expect a new build in a week or so.
5 Likes
Good work, but i noticed many errors in which resulted to 100%usage and couldnt even reboot the router , needed powercycle only!
Sun Jun 23 00:42:43 2019 daemon.warn odhcpd[1479]: A default route is present but there is no public prefix on lan thus we don't announce a default route!
Sun Jun 23 00:42:46 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: luci: accepted login on /admin for root from 192.168.1.10
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:47 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:52 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:42:57 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:02 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:07 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:14 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: Failed to execute call dispatcher target for entry '/admin/dhcplease_status'.
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: The called action terminated with an exception:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: attempt to call global 'duid_to_mac' (a nil value)
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: stack traceback:
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:86: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/tools/status.lua:4>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: /usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:103: in function </usr/lib/lua/luci/controller/admin/index.lua:97>
Sun Jun 23 00:43:19 2019 daemon.err uhttpd[2459]: (tail call): ?
Sun Jun 23 00:43:30 2019 daemon.notice netifd: Interface 'wan' is setting up now
Sun Jun 23 00:43:30 2019 daemon.err insmod: module is already loaded - slhc
Sun Jun 23 00:43:30 2019 daemon.err insmod: module is already loaded - ppp_generic
Sun Jun 23 00:43:30 2019 daemon.err insmod: module is already loaded - pppox
Sun Jun 23 00:43:30 2019 daemon.err insmod: module is already loaded - pppoe
thanks for beta testing!
This looks like LuCI going haywire. Have not noticed it myself and @Axl_Mas also did not run into it.
Do you have a default route with a mac address associated with it?
@ All, are there other people experiencing this?
checked it further, it seems to related with some packages i installed after, probably transmission, also i have read that uhttpd is bugged on early 19.07 firmwares, anyway after uninstalling extra packages everything came to normal, just have in mind that keeping firmware clean as you provide it, it works fine, but adding packages after is not yet a good idea, if you can in a later build,which will be more stable! add transmission packages and samba server too! i see that the router has free about 11MB after flashing your build, so i suppose it is not that a big problem!! thank you!
1 Like
3 hours ago some serious amount of mt76 driver patches went in to master. If anyone tries it, please share the results. Thanks 
Test build for the mir3g is done. When I get back from work I can start testing it.
3 Likes
Bartvz, I am on vacation until the 4th of July, after that date I'll restart to test latest builds.
@ all we usually test each build with lan,2.4g,5g speed test (iperf3) and logs check after intensive use. If you would like to propose any other kind of test please let we know
2 Likes
