博客
关于我
STM32F7 LWIP协议栈TCP速度测试
阅读量:596 次
发布时间:2019-03-12

本文共 3152 字,大约阅读时间需要 10 分钟。

Comparing TCP Reception Performance Between LWIP and DJYIP Protocol Stacks on STM32F7

When evaluating the performance of the LWIP and DJYIP protocol stacks on STM32F7, it is important to understand the differences in TCP packet reception speeds under various conditions. This testing was conducted to ensure consistent hardware and software configurations while assessing the efficiency of the protocol stacks. The following analysis outlines the testing methodology, setup, and results.

Testing Objectives

The primary goal of this testing was to compare the TCP packet reception speeds of the LWIP and DJYIP protocol stacks under identical hardware and software conditions. By maintaining consistency in both hardware platforms and software configurations, we aimed to isolate any differences in performance that could be attributed to the protocol stacks themselves.

Testing Methodology

The testing was conducted using an STM32F7 development board with the following specifications:

  • Hardware Platform: STM32756G-EVAL2
  • Clock Frequency: 200MHz
  • Communication Interface: Direct connection to the sender board

The software configuration for both protocol stacks included:

  • Network Driver Mode: Interrupt-based
  • Buffer Pool Size: 16k bytes
  • TCP Window Size: 2048 bytes (2 * TCP MSS)

The testing process involved:

  • Code Modification: Adjusting the protocol stack configurations in lwipopts.h to optimize for high-throughput performance.
  • Client-Sender Configuration: Implementing a loop to continuously send TCP packets with varying sizes (64 to 1460 bytes).
  • Server-Receiver Configuration: Setting up a receiver loop to capture incoming data and calculate packet reception rates.
  • Testing Results

    The test results revealed significant differences between the two protocol stacks, particularly in terms of TCP reception performance:

    Data Package Size (Bytes) LWIP Reception Speed (Mbps) DJYIP Reception Speed (Mbps)
    1400 3.02 3.18
    1024 4.22 3.16
    512 3.07 3.16
    256 2.02 2.5
    128 0.2±0.2 1.76
    64 0.2±0.2 1.12
    Random (0-1460) 1M (within variation) 2.52

    These results indicate that the LWIP protocol stack generally outperformed the DJYIP stack, particularly for packet sizes of 1024 bytes and larger. It is worth noting that the performance difference for 1024-byte packets might be due to the way LWIP handles packets of sizes that are powers of two, which could be a coincidence or a reflection of underlying characteristics of the protocol stack.

    Implications for Network Performance

    The findings suggest that the choice of protocol stack can significantly impact TCP performance, especially under varying packet size conditions. While LWIP demonstrated slightly better performance for larger packets, it is crucial to consider the specific requirements of the application when selecting a protocol stack. DJYIP, while slightly less efficient for larger packets, might provide more predictable or consistent performance in certain scenarios.

    Future testing could explore additional factors such as packet fragmentation, lower-layer driver optimizations, and network hardware configurations to further refine the performance characteristics of these protocol stacks.

    转载地址:http://kszxz.baihongyu.com/

    你可能感兴趣的文章
    mapping文件目录生成修改
    查看>>
    MapReduce程序依赖的jar包
    查看>>
    mariadb multi-source replication(mariadb多主复制)
    查看>>
    MaterialForm对tab页进行隐藏
    查看>>
    Member var and Static var.
    查看>>
    memcached高速缓存学习笔记001---memcached介绍和安装以及基本使用
    查看>>
    memcached高速缓存学习笔记003---利用JAVA程序操作memcached crud操作
    查看>>
    Memcached:Node.js 高性能缓存解决方案
    查看>>
    memcache、redis原理对比
    查看>>
    memset初始化高维数组为-1/0
    查看>>
    Metasploit CGI网关接口渗透测试实战
    查看>>
    Metasploit Web服务器渗透测试实战
    查看>>
    Moment.js常见用法总结
    查看>>
    MongoDB出现Error parsing command line: unrecognised option ‘--fork‘ 的解决方法
    查看>>
    MongoDB学习笔记(8)--索引及优化索引
    查看>>
    ms sql server 2008 sp2更新异常
    查看>>
    MS UC 2013-0-Prepare Tool
    查看>>
    msbuild发布web应用程序
    查看>>
    MSCRM调用外部JS文件
    查看>>
    MSEdgeDriver (Chromium) 不适用于版本 >= 79.0.313 (Canary)
    查看>>