From nobody Tue Jun 22 12:37:29 2021 X-Original-To: freebsd-arm@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D293F11CEC74 for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 12:38:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from denis@ovsienko.info) Received: from aibo.runbox.com (aibo.runbox.com [91.220.196.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4G8Qt10xsxz4bQy for ; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 12:38:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from denis@ovsienko.info) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ovsienko.info; s=selector2; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=pS3rov/a9Se4bscKl8jZ6qSepqJO7gbbNKOFVmLp6ic=; b=e9MOr7inAqV3Ry1gZPI+uY2okZ ya7xGnAlQhiugH5No02uFz48lQr1CgHaJmnmhLElC8pDXqo507VIHZ+ZiMQRP6yQPaHZNzJs0rlRB /+soNtUZ5CsjV8+sVe9QfBjkmKzcb7JLBK413lrvZGCHbWo7T7+BUjYhF1mREGLUY3cLbnMzVQWXi FgmoDnVMir1j6x9QMK/yJxVUaElfUalrBRx8VMu33+pGmQpvFPnUOooOd3KqBt6bfNlkjAX5S/Uu/ kArlz6hjdqfqc7kRkWScO54NKCauGpJiZ4/+05IidnO3Ubt1HXVyjt84w76sgMsTIPD1tW7Jf+UX1 MIFIMplA==; Received: from [10.9.9.73] (helo=submission02.runbox) by mailtransmit02.runbox with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lvffR-0001yU-W8 for freebsd-arm@freebsd.org; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:38:14 +0200 Received: by submission02.runbox with esmtpsa [Authenticated ID (984599)] (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) id 1lvffN-0003Hs-CA for freebsd-arm@freebsd.org; Tue, 22 Jun 2021 14:38:09 +0200 Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2021 13:37:29 +0100 From: Denis Ovsienko To: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Raspberry Pi 3B+ and pitiful network speeds Message-ID: <20210622133729.47b26900@basepc> In-Reply-To: References: <20210620144513.1f91a68f@basepc> <169baf0b-3f3c-f1dc-4a6f-b8a0ef863f51@denninger.net> <20210620154105.0c83bbcc@basepc> <20210620222922.51da1818@basepc> <3fa3f2a6-8560-f413-b2eb-5c172ce025eb@gmail.com> <6B4F2FB6-ABA1-4CFA-BE2A-6A466C30FF02@yahoo.com> <20210621111301.75fa1c7a@basepc> List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to ARM processors List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-arm List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-arm@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4G8Qt10xsxz4bQy X-Spamd-Bar: --- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=ovsienko.info header.s=selector2 header.b=e9MOr7in; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of denis@ovsienko.info designates 91.220.196.211 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=denis@ovsienko.info X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.10 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RBL_DBL_DONT_QUERY_IPS(0.00)[91.220.196.211:from]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[ovsienko.info:s=selector2]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[91.220.196.211:from]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_GOOD(0.00)[91.220.196.211:from]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:91.220.196.211]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[ovsienko.info]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; SPAMHAUS_ZRD(0.00)[91.220.196.211:from:127.0.2.255]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[ovsienko.info:+]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_NOT_FQDN(0.50)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:50304, ipnet:91.220.196.0/24, country:NO]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-arm]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On Tue, 22 Jun 2021 08:24:02 +1000 MJ wrote: > [=C2=A0 1] 0.00-30.19 sec=C2=A0=C2=A0 310 MBytes=C2=A0 86.0 Mbits/sec >=20 > Now, I could run these very same tests off Devuan if you like? This > may help disprove any network issues? Although, as I've stated, the > Devuan version running on the RPI3 consistently gets up to 3 times > this speed. Thank you for clarifying the test results Matt. From the numbers it indeed looks like the TCP throughput never reaches even 100Mb/s. Whilst the root cause of this might be a driver issue, or a consequence of the "early access" board USB implementation not working well in FreeBSD, it would help to eliminate trivial explanations as well. One such thing that comes to my mind is whilst the FreeBSD RPI end is displaying 1000Mb/s in ifconfig, it might not represent the actual mode negotiated between the PHYs, and that the actual mode might be 100Base-TX, possibly even half-duplex. So if you could confirm how the other end of the link (assuming it works correctly) is seeing the Ethernet connection and its error counters (frame length, CRC, collisions), that would improve the sense of where the root cause might be. Also I wonder if limiting the negotiated mode (or nailing it down at both ends) to 100Base-TX/full would actually make the link perform at 100Base-TX level (it is not even there right now). It might look a far cry, but in my experience any hardware and any software can malfunction, often in unexpected places. Considering the classic "swap one component at a time and watch if anything changes" method you are already using, you might want to run another TCP throughput test using an external USB Ethernet interface. If that delivers 300Mb/s (or even steady 100Mb/s), that would be interesting. Also it might help to plug a fast USB storage into this board and to run a block device read test with dd to confirm that this specific board is able to push bytes through USB fast enough when it is running FreeBSD. I would unlikely do that myself anytime soon because the only RPI3B+ I use runs NetBSD and is not available for tests. Most importantly, I am not a FreeBSD developer, but the developers would likely want to receive as exact problem statement as possible. Have a nice day. --=20 Denis Ovsienko