From nobody Fri Dec 22 22:14:17 2023 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 4SxhRJ4g9Hz54Yfb for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 22:14:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@copacetic.net) Received: from starlight.copacetic.net (starlight.copacetic.net [166.78.105.238]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4SxhRJ2lXSz4XkL for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 22:14:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from steve@copacetic.net) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: from [172.16.200.151] (c-73-149-127-197.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [73.149.127.197]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by starlight.copacetic.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 83A254AC32; Fri, 22 Dec 2023 22:14:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2023 17:14:17 -0500 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 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: FreeBSD 14.0-RELEASE and Raspberry Pi CM4 4GB Content-Language: en-US To: Mike Karels Cc: freebsd-arm@FreeBSD.org References: <445940f7-e8f1-4dbc-87be-99bfd705141d@copacetic.net> From: Steve Bernacki In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:19994, ipnet:166.78.64.0/18, country:US] X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4SxhRJ2lXSz4XkL Hi Mike, Indeed, I'm getting a lot of retransmits: [  5] local 172.16.200.2 port 55551 connected to 172.16.200.182 port 5201 [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr  Cwnd [  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  36.2 MBytes   304 Mbits/sec   60   9.98 KBytes [  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  35.7 MBytes   300 Mbits/sec  143    111 KBytes [  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  34.9 MBytes   293 Mbits/sec  141   7.13 KBytes [  5]   3.00-4.00   sec  33.9 MBytes   284 Mbits/sec  198   99.5 KBytes [  5]   4.00-5.00   sec  34.9 MBytes   292 Mbits/sec  167   1.43 KBytes [  5]   5.00-6.00   sec  34.2 MBytes   287 Mbits/sec  221   2.85 KBytes [  5]   6.00-7.00   sec  34.1 MBytes   286 Mbits/sec  169    100 KBytes [  5]   7.00-8.00   sec  35.2 MBytes   295 Mbits/sec  159   7.13 KBytes [  5]   8.00-9.00   sec  34.3 MBytes   287 Mbits/sec  138   4.28 KBytes [  5]   9.00-10.00  sec  33.3 MBytes   279 Mbits/sec  182   2.85 KBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval           Transfer     Bitrate         Retr [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   347 MBytes   291 Mbits/sec 1578             sender [  5]   0.00-10.00  sec   346 MBytes   291 Mbits/sec                  receiver Thanks, Steve On 12/22/2023 9:23 AM, Mike Karels wrote: > On 22 Dec 2023, at 6:20, Steve Bernacki wrote: > >> I recently purchased a RPI CM4 with 4GB and 32GB eMMC to replace my aging FreeBSD firewall. I managed to install FreeBSD 14.0-RELEASE-p3 on it, and both Ethernet devices (genet0 and ue0) were properly identified. However, network throughput on my gigabit network is pretty bad; iperf3 reports a maximum transfer speed of 291 Mbits/sec. Flashing OpenWRT on the same hardware using the same ethernet port, I'm able to achieve 923 Mbits/sec. >> >> Does anyone have any suggestions on how to improve throughput under FreeBSD? >> >> Thank you >> Steve > I just tested with an RPi4 (4 GB) and 14.0 using iperf3. It looks like I'm getting > a rather variable number of retransmissions. On my first run (client on RPi 4), > I got 460 Mb/s with a lot of retransmissions, but the next couple of runs, including > one receiving, I got about 940 Mb even with some retransmissions. The peers were > fairly fast FreeBSD 13.2 and 15-current systems. Are you seeing retransmissions? > > I'll try to look into this, but I'm not sure when I'll get to it. > > Mike >