Re: lwip 1.3.1 testing

[Simon Kallweit <simon.kallweit@intefo.ch>]

Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 03:08:20PM +0300, Sergei Gavrikov wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 09:41:13AM +0200, Simon Kallweit wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I have done a new lwip test release with the following changes:
>>>
>>> * incorporated Sergei's patch (ctrl-c support)
>>> * added an lwip_eth_simple and lwip_eth_sequential template
>>>
>>> The new test release can be downloaded from  
>>> http://download.westlicht.ch/lwip-20090825.tar.gz
>> [snip]
>>
>>> Testing on real hardware would be especially useful. Also testing on  
>>> big-endian targets might reveal some issues, as I've only been testing  
>>> on little-endian platforms.
>> Hi
>>
>> Simon, I'll retest new package ASAP. And it seems for me that you would
>> get more volunteers if you will announce your nowadays work with those
>> minimal setup instructions on the ecos-discuss list too. Thanks for a
>> tip about the host's side setup for nc test, I will try it too.
> 
> I retried nc master/slave test with your template and suggested pbuf
> values. For synthetic (I used tap interface) I got good results with
> lwIP, but, for real target, nc test passed for 100% master load and no
> load of slave side only. I got about 2Mbits per second with the DM900
> Ethernet driver (that driver is too slow, it uses memcpy() on every 4
> bytes arrived or sent), and my board gives only about 15 VAX Mips for
> RAM startup, and it seemed for me that was normal result.

Did you use the old lwip port on that board too? Did you get similar 
results in performance?

> For small TCP packets ("y\n"), I had got good results
> 
> yes | socat - tcp4:<board_ip>:7 ;# some stress tcp stream
> 
> "tcpecho" test did return "y" very long time, until I did break pipe
> (^C).
> 
> Unfortunately, I could not manage "udpecho" using socat as above neither
> for synthetic nor real hardware. So, my today score for lwIP 1.3.1 is
> 
> + http_simple
> + http_sequential
> + ns_slave_test
> + tcpecho
> - udpecho
> 
> What was your way to test "udpecho"?

I used nc (netcat) to send/receive UDP packets. But I did no stress 
testing with tcpecho, udpecho.

Simon