Netgear R7800 (Nighthawk X4S – AC2600) - status

Post new topic   Reply to topic    DD-WRT Forum Forum Index -> Atheros WiSOC based Hardware
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197  Next
Author Message
msoengineer
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 21 Jan 2017
Posts: 890
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Tue Feb 11, 2020 17:35    Post subject: Reply with quote
SFE does not work with Q.o.S. turned on.

The R7800 should be able to hit 600mbps just fine.
Are you sure your Q.o.S. settings are set the right way?
Again, maybe you need to do a reset first and then try again.

_________________
TIPS/TRICKS: Best QCA Wifi Settings||QCA WIFI WIKI||Latency tricks||QoS Port priority||NEVER USE MU-MIMO||
Why to NOT use MU-MIMO||Max Wifi Pwr by Country||Linux Wifi Pwr||MCS Index Speeds & AX MCS||Correct QCA 5Ghz chnls to use||WIFI Chnl Freq WIKI

[R9000]BS 42847 (Main Router)
[EA8500]BS 42598 (Offsite)
[R7800]taking a nap
[WDR3600]BS 42567 (Offsite)
[A7v5]BS 42790 (Offsite+spare here napping)
Sponsor
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 7:09    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wonder if my version has some pretty major bugs. Basically had the same issues after doing a NVRAM reset. I'm running r42287.

Even setting HT80, AC only, it doesn't seem to work properly. I was getting 400mbps after enabling short preamble, however after trying to enable TurboQAM it dropped me down to 173 and no amount of tweaking is bringing it back to 400mbps.

I was misreading things. I thought because Voxel and Stock supported 80/40/20 (like my 86u), DDWRT would too. It appears you can only do 20/40 as per the option without explicitly setting it to 80. So 400mbps is the max unless I want to kick some older AC devices off my network. That being said I'm still not getting it.

QoS seems to now have proper throughput, getting close to max speeds when I set a really high max.

Not sure how you determine SFE is off? With QoS on, the radial button is still enabled on the setup page.
tatsuya46
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 7285
Location: YWG, Canada

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 7:22    Post subject: Reply with quote
Bensam123 wrote:
Not sure how you determine SFE is off? With QoS on, the radial button is still enabled on the setup page.


its overridden and force disabled. if u override the override and force enable sfe, qos will only half work, being on upload only not download. at least that how it was when i last looked at it.

_________________
LATEST FIRMWARE(S)

BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers

[x86_64] Haswell i3-4150 ------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] R7800 ------------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] DIR-862L --------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] DIR-862L --------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] WNDR4300 v1 --------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
▲ ACTIVE / INACTIVE ▼
[BROADCOM] DIR-860L A1 ----------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42644 std


If you use DSLReports please enable hi-res bufferbloat.


Sigh.. why do i exist anyway..
ho1Aetoo
DD-WRT User


Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Posts: 181

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 11:00    Post subject: Reply with quote
@Bensam123

no idea what you mean exactly
a correct VHT80 configuration delivers 20+40+80mhz wide channels.

you should post your complete WLAN configuration
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 14:50    Post subject: Reply with quote
ho1Aetoo wrote:
@Bensam123

no idea what you mean exactly
a correct VHT80 configuration delivers 20+40+80mhz wide channels.

you should post your complete WLAN configuration


Did not know that, when I selected VHT80 my laptop refused to connect and assumed it didn't support 20/40 (as it wasn't explicitly mentioned).

Still refuses to connect, however my cell connects at 866mpbs (which is what originally happened). Both cell and laptop work fine with 86u and stock/voxel.



Short preamble, single beamforming, multi beamforming, airtime fairness, and turboqam (in the 2.4ghz options) are the only ones I've been really messing around with. Channel width is either on 40 or 80 (since 80 doesn't work with my laptop it's been on 40).
msoengineer
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 21 Jan 2017
Posts: 890
Location: Illinois

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 14:55    Post subject: Reply with quote
You Cannot use auto channel...ever...

see my signature below for the settings you should be using...it's that simple.

More than likely your router is detecting neighboring routers and it's going to a "safe" HT20/40 mode.

_________________
TIPS/TRICKS: Best QCA Wifi Settings||QCA WIFI WIKI||Latency tricks||QoS Port priority||NEVER USE MU-MIMO||
Why to NOT use MU-MIMO||Max Wifi Pwr by Country||Linux Wifi Pwr||MCS Index Speeds & AX MCS||Correct QCA 5Ghz chnls to use||WIFI Chnl Freq WIKI

[R9000]BS 42847 (Main Router)
[EA8500]BS 42598 (Offsite)
[R7800]taking a nap
[WDR3600]BS 42567 (Offsite)
[A7v5]BS 42790 (Offsite+spare here napping)
ho1Aetoo
DD-WRT User


Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Posts: 181

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 15:20    Post subject: Reply with quote
as already mentioned do not use auto channel (it's
faulty like hell in dd-wrt)

second use LL or UU for testing (LU / UL is also faulty)

not sure what channels are allowed in the USA try 36+UU (+6)

look at the WLAN-Scan for neighboring Stations (sort by signal strengh)
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Wed Feb 12, 2020 15:56    Post subject: Reply with quote
Got it. It was doing something silly in the background while it was on auto, which is why I couldn't nail it down. Any of the channels pretty much fixes the issue.

Swear I tried 161 the other night, I must've had channel width set to something else while doing it.
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:06    Post subject: Reply with quote
So, I'm back... Curiously is QoS broken in DDWRT? I don't remember it being so easy to just outright wreck it. The router performs better without QoS on. When selecting HTB or HFSC it kinda works, but if you actually try to 'battle' different hosts on the network against the router the router outright explodes. If HFSC is on I can't seemingly add one of the computers without it causing the WAN connection to just disconnect outright.

(Figured out the above after testing. If HFSC is enabled and any computer is set to standard or below it causes the WAN to drop out.)

I first noticed a issue when attempting to stream and it didn't seem to make a whole lot of a difference whether it's on/off (compared to a 86u). While downloads throttle and it looks like it's working, if you fire something up that competes for bandwidth it just chokes. I tried running a torrent client with a few big torrents on it, over 600 connections, hitting ~300mpbs (under 460 my connection provides). With either HFSC or HTB on tons of packetloss happens, extremely erratic ping times on a maximum priority system compared to a 'bulk' that's doing the torrenting. If I try to run a speedtest while the torrent is running, it squeezes a measly 90mbps out of the connection while the torrent machine runs full tilt. Video streams are interrupted on the maximum priority machine and of course includes anything latency sensitive.

Manual speed limitations work, but that's extremely rudimentary QoS.

Turning off QoS, the packetloss almost completely goes away, however all the fun of having a fully unhinged network happens. The Torrent machine is basically a worst case test scenario, but it seems as though somethings broken. I used to use DDWRT on my 68u and with HTB/HFSC FQ_Codel it didn't have these sorts of issues. This isn't remotely close to the performance of my 86u on Merlin.

Doing some benchmarking, packetloss starts happening when the torrent machine hits around 220-250 connections.

Comparing HTB to HFSC, HFSC limits the torrent machine to around 120mbps, however it doesn't seem to matter (QoS limit is 420/19, under my 460/22 cap). It results in roughly the same amount of packetloss, maximum priority machine still has dropped streams, voip is still broken.

Watching stats, CPU utilization is still around 40-50%, free memory is around 75% for HFSC. HTB CPU sits at around 30-40% with higher speeds and better pings

I heard good things about cake, which actually seems inferior to FQ_codel based on testing with pingplotter and various loads (not specifically torrents), but this seems ridiculous.


If I remember right I think I was using Kongs build on the 68u, does anyone have access to his last version for this router or is there a repository?
ho1Aetoo
DD-WRT User


Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Posts: 181

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 12:48    Post subject: Reply with quote
~500mbit linespeed + QoS + 600 parallel connections on this CPU is a good joke

i can fully utilize the CPU with a vdsl100 line und 16 parallel up+down connections

https://forum.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?p=1185175#1185175


Last edited by ho1Aetoo on Thu Feb 13, 2020 14:13; edited 1 time in total
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 14:04    Post subject: Reply with quote
This was bothering me, to answer my own question here, I found a bootleg version of Kongs older firmware. Works fantastic with the above testing parameters. A lot less knobs to tweak, but extremely solid. Currently outperforming my 86u with HTB+FQ_Codel on ping times. Only occasional packet loss showed up after 490+ connections. Even then it only seems to really happen when I battle against the torrent machine with a speed test on the high priority machine.

The maximum priority machine will steal almost all the bandwidth from the bulk torrent machine, respecting what is listed in the wiki.

Packetloss is only around 4.7% on HTB compared to 8% with HTB and 10% with HFSC on BS.

Removing ACK from high priority removed a lot of the PL.

Kong I'm getting better average ping and less jitter then the 86u with Merlin under the full torrent testload. However the 86u Merlin I don't have any PL.

Better CPU utilization under both HTB and HFSC compared to BS, however it wasn't maxed out in the first place.

Despite packetloss video stream on the high priority machine never buffered or lost connection.

Post where I found the builds: https://forum.dd-wrt.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=321090&sid=67915d12aa45ac3d2a856ca908f028be

Going to further add, I thought it looked like the cores were throttling and dropping down to 800mhz. Turns out it's the scaling governor (old problem). Setting the cores to their maximum frequency removed all packetloss on primary targets and further improved latency and jitter by a slight bit.

Code:
for CPUFREQ in /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpufreq/scaling_governor; do [ -f $CPUFREQ ] || continue; echo -n performance > $CPUFREQ; done
echo 2 > /proc/irq/255/smp_affinity


After Kong and tweaking it looks superior to my 86u Merlin router.
ho1Aetoo
DD-WRT User


Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Posts: 181

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 14:25    Post subject: Reply with quote
yes the ondemand govenor and frequency scaling causes package drops

and i think the performance govenor is standard in the BS builds


QoS also only runs on one processor core and the processor is definitely too weak for 500mbit lines and 500+ connections .. there are many many small packages that have to be processed and in principle only powerful x86 can do this
Per Yngve Berg
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 13 Aug 2013
Posts: 5445
Location: Akershus, Norway

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 15:22    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ondemand is working fine when reducing the upscale_threshold. BS had it on 80 and it took a long time to wake up. Reducing it to 35 is a sweet spot.

What processor is the QOS running on? Does it help to move to the other or have LAN+WAN on one and QOS on the other?
Bensam123
DD-WRT Novice


Joined: 08 May 2013
Posts: 27

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 15:38    Post subject: Reply with quote
Negatory on that one. I'd say Kong firmware brought it up to par with my 86u-Merlin, if not ahead. I can't test faster then 460mbps (420 in qos), so your mileage may vary, however 600 connections, 9 torrents, it eventually settled on 200mbps, even though it can run faster then that with HTB/FQ_Codel with almost no impact on my network. The max priority PC could pull close to 400mbps and suck all the bandwidth off the bulk PC.

I didn't test for torrent speed, so it's possible the 86u-Merlin was getting higher throughput on the torrent PC while maintaining very similar latency on the high priority PC. I'll check that later, either way big improvement over BS if you're looking for QoS specifically. Sad it doesn't support things like CAKE, but if it doesn't work right, it doesn't matter, right?


Not sure in particular, however much like with frequency scaling in a lot of other applications (CPUs) it's the enemy of latency and time sensitive applications especially in a crude first generation iterations. Based on what I saw with PL I'm going to leave it off and honestly I'm sure it saves almost 0 power.

Quote:
Does it help to move to the other or have LAN+WAN on one and QOS on the other?


Haven't tried and don't know how. I would say BS QoS is borderline broken, it might do something for the Kong version though. Usually lower utilization leads to lower latency, so I'm not against trying it.

It's not difficult to load up my test scenario for yourself. Just get a bunch of high seeded torrents, crank up connections and setup QoS with one PC with Pingplotter on it (the latency sensitive/high priority PC) and another with the torrents on it (bulk or low priority). Then you see how the latency sensitive PC is effected by the bit sucker. That's basically a pretty extreme case, so it should bring out any horrible nuances. However I have seen routers have problems with lots of PCs, but do fine with a couple high demand PCs instead.
tatsuya46
DD-WRT Guru


Joined: 03 Jan 2010
Posts: 7285
Location: YWG, Canada

PostPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 18:25    Post subject: Reply with quote
cpu load issue needs to be fixed, kernel 4.x really ruins ipq806x even at max freq. when its at idle (if ondemand is used) latency skyrockets. been like this for years, excluding later kong builds.
_________________
LATEST FIRMWARE(S)

BrainSlayer wrote:
we just do it since we do not like any restrictions enforced by stupid cocaine snorting managers

[x86_64] Haswell i3-4150 ------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] R7800 ------------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] DIR-862L --------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] DIR-862L --------------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
[QUALCOMM] WNDR4300 v1 --------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42803 std
▲ ACTIVE / INACTIVE ▼
[BROADCOM] DIR-860L A1 ----------> DD-WRT v3.0-r42644 std


If you use DSLReports please enable hi-res bufferbloat.


Sigh.. why do i exist anyway..
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197  Next Display posts from previous:    Page 193 of 197
Post new topic   Reply to topic    DD-WRT Forum Forum Index -> Atheros WiSOC based Hardware All times are GMT

Navigation

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum