| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4E3AD2B9.6010905@01019freenet.de> Date: Thu, 04 Aug 2011 19:11:21 +0200 From: Andreas Hartmann <andihartmann@...19freenet.de> To: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net> CC: Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Alan Piszcz <ap@...arrain.com> Subject: Re: Linux Wireless USB-Stick Question Larry Finger schrieb: > On 08/03/2011 02:53 PM, Justin Piszcz wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Under Windows, you can achieve 10-15MiB/s.. >> >> Under Linux, even with 150mbps USB wireless adapters, the max never >> appears to >> go above > 3-4MiB/s, to work around this, order more USB-wifi ticks >> and run them >> in parallel far away from each other with USB >> extenders: >> >> box1: >> ------------- >> wlan0 IEEE 802.11bg ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=54 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> wlan1 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=58.5 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> wlan2 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=39 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> >> box2: >> ------------- >> wlan0 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=58.5 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> wlan1 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=52 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> wlan2 IEEE 802.11bgn ESSID:"hidden" >> Bit Rate=52 Mb/s Tx-Power=20 dBm >> >> But I was curious if anyone had achieved > 10 MiB/s with any wireless >> adapter >> with Linux? >> >> Also, those native Linux USB adapters (carl) work good, so far. >> With the patch provided earlier for the rt2800usb driver, it is no longer >> crashing under 3.0 so I put two of them on a single box plus a carl >> based one, >> now I get better I/O, e.g. 4MiB/s x 6 = 24MiB/s. > > On a 150 Mbps connection running the following script > > #!/bin/sh > > dest="sonylap" # set the servername > > while true ; do > netperf -t TCP_MAERTS -H $dest > netperf -t TCP_STREAM -H $dest > netperf -t TCP_SENDFILE -H $dest > done > > I get the following for a D-Link DWA-130 containing a Realtek RTL8192SU > with driver r8712u: > > finger@...rylap:~/bcm_git/vendor-driver/5.10.56.46> ~/netperf.sh > TCP MAERTS TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to sonylap > (192.168.1.50) port 0 AF_INET > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.04 53.52 > TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to sonylap > (192.168.1.50) port 0 AF_INET > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.03 55.58 > TCP SENDFILE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to sonylap > (192.168.1.50) port 0 AF_INET > Recv Send Send > Socket Socket Message Elapsed > Size Size Size Time Throughput > bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec > > 87380 16384 16384 10.06 65.26 > > I claim that 50-65 Mbps is pretty good. This means about half of fast ethernet (5-6,5 MB/s). It's too insufficient for 802.11n / 40 MHz. rt3572sta (Linksys WUSB600N v2) against rt2860 based AP (rt2800pci) - from one room to another: Do 4. Aug 18:48:27 CEST 2011 TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.07 82.51 TCP MAERTS TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.02 128.94 TCP SENDFILE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.09 77.47 rt2800usb doesn't work at all with WUSB600N v2. ar9285 (ath9k) against rt2860 based AP (rt2800pci) - through reinforced concrete floor: Do 4. Aug 19:03:04 CEST 2011 TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.10 80.23 TCP MAERTS TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.06 80.82 TCP SENDFILE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to srv (1.1.1.1) port 0 AF_INET Recv Send Send Socket Socket Message Elapsed Size Size Size Time Throughput bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec 87380 16384 16384 10.10 78.51 -> there is room for optimization! I don't think, that the rt3572sta is the best solution absolutely seen :-). Unfortunately, I don't have a windows machine to compare ... . Maybe, I could get one to test ... . Andreas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists