After upgrading from 4.8.4 to 4.9.0, the new native SQM GUI works correctly, but the values shown in LuCI SQM are swapped

Firmware: GL.iNet 4.9.0
Device: GL-MT3600BE (Beryl)

Example:

In the native GL.iNet GUI:

  • Download: 248 Mbps

  • Upload: 98 Mbps

The SQM performance matches these values:

  • Download test result: ~248 Mbps

  • Upload test result: ~98 Mbps

  • Bufferbloat: A+

However, in LuCI SQM the values are displayed as:

  • Download: 98 Mbps

  • Upload: 248 Mbps

The underlying /etc/config/sqm also appears with:

option upload '248000'
option download '98000'

Despite this, SQM behaves correctly according to the native GUI values.

Before firmware 4.9.0, LuCI showed the values correctly. This seems to have appeared after the introduction of the native SQM GUI.

Could you please check whether the LuCI SQM integration needs adjustment to match the new GL.iNet SQM implementation?

Please note that the native GUI values are the correct ones; the issue is that LuCI displays the opposite direction.

It's due to how the devs made the SQM on the LAN hence it's flipped when looking via luci.

I am under the impression that having SQM on LAN can have some overhead on local clients and potentially restrict transfer speeds @will.qiu is this true? Also when will we have the option to disable either the upload or download with a value of zero like in Luci?

@jono also you dont really need to limit the download but unfortunately the current glinet gui doesn't allow this to be blank. If you go to Luci and install the plugin: luci-app-sqm

Then go to Luci > Network > SQM QoS you can change the value of your download/upload (depending if you are setting via LAN or WAN interface) to “0” and then apply it will then show on the glinet gui as not being applied. Also in there I changed the default behaviour that glinet set (Lan) and chose my (wan) interface, this then only applies to that interface and puts the values back in the correct boxes, but again it's technically correct how it's showing prior because it's on the LAN.

1 Like

Thank you for clearing that up.

We have made specific optimizations for this, so it should not cause such issues.

We are also exploring using multiple SQM instances for all WAN interfaces in future versions to address the scenarios we mentioned previously. However, this is still under internal evaluation and consideration, and there is currently no official decision or ETA available.

We have recorded this request and discussed it with the product team. However, there is currently no official result or ETA available.

For users who need this functionality at the moment, you can still configure it through LuCI, or set a value much higher than your actual downstream bandwidth to achieve a similar effect.