Hi, all
I'm using BeagleBone Black(1GHz) and wl1837 cape, with TI linux sdk(linux-am335x-evm-03.01.00.06), Wilink8 R8.7 patched.
I simply deploy a mesh network with 2 boards to evaluate the performance of network. Before the experiment, I use wlconf to initialize and configure 2.4GHz MIMO usage and 2 2.4 antenna as said in 'wlconf application report'. Then just using mesh_start to attend a network in 2412 frequency. Two devices are close to each other. Iperf is used to test the UDP throughput, the result is poor, in average 40Mbps, far from 100Mbps posted in 'WiLink™ 8 WLAN Features Guide' which use 700MHz CPU. BTW, I run nothing in background. Before the test, CPU usage is 9%.
root@am335x-evm:~# iperf -c 10.20.30.2 -u -b 80m ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 10.20.30.2, UDP port 5001 Sending 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 160 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 10.20.30.1 port 49311 connected with 10.20.30.2 port 5001 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 50.3 MBytes 42.2 Mbits/sec [ 3] Sent 35874 datagrams [ 3] Server Report: [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 50.3 MBytes 42.2 Mbits/sec 0.205 ms 0/35873 (0%) [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order
After that I try other modes, SISO40 and SISO20. SISO40(5GHz usage) makes no change, 40Mbps; while SISO20 becomes slower, almost 36Mbps. Since the results are so close, I suspect that two antenna are not both used.
I also start BBB as an Access Point, setup ieee80211n for sure. The UDP throughput can be 50Mbps.
root@am335x-evm:~/mesh_topo_1018# iperf -c 10.20.29.2 -u -b 80m ------------------------------------------------------------ Client connecting to 10.20.29.2, UDP port 5001 Sending 1470 byte datagrams UDP buffer size: 160 KByte (default) ------------------------------------------------------------ [ 3] local 10.20.29.1 port 57892 connected with 10.20.29.2 port 5001 [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 60.0 MBytes 50.3 Mbits/sec [ 3] Sent 42802 datagrams [ 3] Server Report: [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 60.0 MBytes 50.3 Mbits/sec 0.777 ms 0/42801 (0%) [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1 datagrams received out-of-order
I wonder if I miss something, for example configuration or any. Or this is its best performance. Any suggestion is appreciated. Thanks.