Ben Greear wrote:
> On 05/30/2012 07:48 PM, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> > Ben Greear wrote:
> >> I am not sure why there is such a big difference, but possibly
> >> sending wifi is harder than receiving it, and the Atom processor
> >> just can't keep up.
> >
> > I have a small Atom-based netbook, I'l
On Thursday 31 May 2012 11:11 AM, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> should we check if (work_pending(&sc->hw_reset_work)) like we do in
>> ath_beacon_tasklet in all the other work routine that access hardware
>> registers in case the hw_reset_work is not cancelled(possib
Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> should we check if (work_pending(&sc->hw_reset_work)) like we do in
> ath_beacon_tasklet in all the other work routine that access hardware
> registers in case the hw_reset_work is not cancelled(possible in
> ath_set_channel)
Probably, but this needs to be done
Hi Sujith,
On Thursday 31 May 2012 08:14 AM, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
>> before the STA is associated PLL4(0x1618c) always seem to dump
>> zero, which causes a softlockup as we keep on polling infinitely
>> PLL4's 8th bit. Once PLL4'S 8th bit is set indicates we ca
On 05/30/2012 07:48 PM, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> Ben Greear wrote:
>> I am not sure why there is such a big difference, but possibly
>> sending wifi is harder than receiving it, and the Atom processor
>> just can't keep up.
>
> I have a small Atom-based netbook, I'll try with it and see what numbe
Hi Adrian,
On Thursday 31 May 2012 12:18 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> (Yes, this is a public response.)
>
> Hi,
>
> That has me a bit concerned. Waiting for the STA to be associated is
> really just some kind of "settling" delay. You're still TX/RXing at
> that point.
yeah, but i am pretty sure in t
Ben Greear wrote:
> I am not sure why there is such a big difference, but possibly
> sending wifi is harder than receiving it, and the Atom processor
> just can't keep up.
I have a small Atom-based netbook, I'll try with it and see what numbers
can be seen. It's a pain to pry it open and bolt a di
Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> before the STA is associated PLL4(0x1618c) always seem to dump
> zero, which causes a softlockup as we keep on polling infinitely
> PLL4's 8th bit. Once PLL4'S 8th bit is set indicates we can take
> PLL3(0x16188) readings which tells us whether PLL is locked or not
Ben Greear wrote:
> We started testing with two AR9380 NICs today (one AP, the other STA).
> I applied Felix's skb optimization patch, and the ath9k memleak fix patch
> on top of 3.3.7+.
>
> When we generate traffic using a modified version of pktgen,
> the STA interface transmits at around 310Mbp
On May 30, 2012, at 10:57 AM, Stratos Keranidis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am about to order some new cards for testing capabilities of ath9k.
>
> Currently I have cards with the AR5008, AR5418 chipset, which does not
> support 3x3 MIMO.
>
> I looked in the list of ath9k-supported chipsets to find c
(Yes, this is a public response.)
Hi,
That has me a bit concerned. Waiting for the STA to be associated is
really just some kind of "settling" delay. You're still TX/RXing at
that point.
I think we need to speak to the baseband/clock teams and figure out
why this is actually occuring.
Can we pl
Hi,
AR5416/AR5418, AR9130, AR9160 - 3 antenna, 3 chain, two stream
devices. They're 2T2R stream, so only up to MCS15.
You need to use AR93xx or later NICs with 3 antenna, 3 stream support.
(Not all of them are 3 stream devices however.)
Ben has experience with three stream devices. He's a good s
On 05/30/2012 10:57 AM, Stratos Keranidis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I am about to order some new cards for testing capabilities of ath9k.
>
> Currently I have cards with the AR5008, AR5418 chipset, which does not
> support 3x3 MIMO.
>
> I looked in the list of ath9k-supported chipsets to find cards that
Hello,
I am about to order some new cards for testing capabilities of ath9k.
Currently I have cards with the AR5008, AR5418 chipset, which does not
support 3x3 MIMO.
I looked in the list of ath9k-supported chipsets to find cards that
support 3x3 MIMO and I have concluded in the following options
From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan
steps to recreate:
load latest ath9k driver with AR9485
stop the network-manager and wpa_supplicant
bring the interface up
Call Trace:
[] ? ath_hw_check+0xe0/0xe0 [ath9k]
[] __const_udelay+0x28/0x30
[] ar9003_get_pll_sqsum_dvc+0x4a/0
Hi,
Chipset is AR9331. Thanks for the link. Shall try the same.
On 5/30/12 6:57 PM, "Mohammed Shafi" wrote:
>On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Sunil Mehta
>wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>
>hi,
>
>>
>> We are working on Wi-Fi device in STA mode and find that the uplink
>> throughput is very poor. Whereas whe
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Sunil Mehta wrote:
>
> Hi,
hi,
>
> We are working on Wi-Fi device in STA mode and find that the uplink
> throughput is very poor. Whereas when the same device is configured in AP
> mode its throughput performance is as expected.
>
> The application is based on AR
Hello Sir,
Re: [ath9k-devel] Low Throughput while Using minstrel_ht fixed-rate
Solu:-attached Rajkumar's fixed MCS patch
Where to find this patch sir.Is it available for users.If you can
provide this path it's one of the big help for me.
As per your suggestion I disable the ath9k_rate_control
Hi,
We are working on Wi-Fi device in STA mode and find that the uplink
throughput is very poor. Whereas when the same device is configured in AP
mode its throughput performance is as expected.
The application is based on AR93xx platform and drivers are from version
U10_1020.
Any help for the s
Hello Sir,
I have some more question.
Actually I used ubuntu operating system with kernel version
2.6.38-13-generic-pae which it self has default ath9k driver.
But I also used compact-wireless-2.6.38.2-2-ns ,n when I wanted to work
with compact wireless ath9k driver, I used following step
1]To d
Hi,
It's easy to get raw FFT data from the card, but then some cryptoanalytic work
should be done in MathLab. Actualy I'm busy (lazy) man... will wait for open
information which Adrian promised. :) I beleave the open source community can
implement these features better than MicroTik did it.
Best
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 4:13 PM, Stratos Keranidis wrote:
> Hi Shafi,
Hi Stratos,
>
> I cleared the following flag in init.c:
>
> hw->flags |= IEEE80211_HW_AMPDU_AGGREGATION;
>
> and I confirm that AMPDU aggregation is disabled,
> as the function: static enum ATH_AGGR_STATUS ath_tx_form_aggr
> d
Hi Shafi,
I cleared the following flag in init.c:
hw->flags |= IEEE80211_HW_AMPDU_AGGREGATION;
and I confirm that AMPDU aggregation is disabled,
as the function: static enum ATH_AGGR_STATUS ath_tx_form_aggr
does not anymore print the information I have inserted in order to
print the aggregation
Hello.
Some updates follow inline.
On 05/24/2012 04:14 PM, Claudio Pisa wrote:
> I am working on a research project that uses the txop mechanism to
> distinguish, on a 802.11b/g STA, between packet losses caused by
> collisions and by noise.
>
> I found some issues that are not clear to me on bot
24 matches
Mail list logo
