* [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI.
@ 2011-05-13 11:04 Alex Hacker
2011-05-13 11:48 ` Mohammed Shafi
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alex Hacker @ 2011-05-13 11:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ath9k-devel
I found that MCS rates 16-19 HGI not present in rate tables. Which cause of its
absence?
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI.
2011-05-13 11:04 [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI Alex Hacker
@ 2011-05-13 11:48 ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-05-13 13:45 ` Alex Hacker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Mohammed Shafi @ 2011-05-13 11:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ath9k-devel
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 4:34 PM, Alex Hacker <hacker@epn.ru> wrote:
> I found that MCS rates 16-19 HGI not present in rate tables. Which cause of its
> absence?
this is my theory, it may be wrong,
all those rates in the rate table are marked as invalid and also they
are HT20 rates. also not hardwares support HT20 SGI
we have this check
if (AR_SREV_9287_11_OR_LATER(ah) || AR_SREV_9271(ah))
pCap->hw_caps |= ATH9K_HW_CAP_SGI_20;
so may be to avoid the rate control algorithm selecting those rates
this might had be done.
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI.
2011-05-13 11:48 ` Mohammed Shafi
@ 2011-05-13 13:45 ` Alex Hacker
2011-05-13 17:15 ` Alex Hacker
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alex Hacker @ 2011-05-13 13:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ath9k-devel
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 05:18:37PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
> this is my theory, it may be wrong,
> all those rates in the rate table are marked as invalid and also they
> are HT20 rates. also not hardwares support HT20 SGI
> we have this check
> if (AR_SREV_9287_11_OR_LATER(ah) || AR_SREV_9271(ah))
> pCap->hw_caps |= ATH9K_HW_CAP_SGI_20;
>
> so may be to avoid the rate control algorithm selecting those rates
> this might had be done.
Yes, I know that the AR9280 does not support SGI rates in HT20 mode.
I'm not about this little bit. The current ath9k rate table in rc.c contains
3 spatial streams rates (MCS16-MCS23) for newer three chain AR93xx chips. This table
includes information about MCSs 16-23 SGI and 20-23 HGI but not MCSs 16-19 HGI this
is true for HT20 and HT40. Yes, some of these rates marked as invalid but present.
I can not explain this fact for myself. May be Senthil baboo can help me?
Best regards,
Alex.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI.
2011-05-13 13:45 ` Alex Hacker
@ 2011-05-13 17:15 ` Alex Hacker
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Alex Hacker @ 2011-05-13 17:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: ath9k-devel
On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 07:45:32PM +0600, Alex Hacker wrote:
> This table includes information about MCSs 16-23 SGI and 20-23 HGI but not MCSs 16-19
> HGI this is true for HT20 and HT40.
Oh sorry, SGI = normal (long) guard interval here.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2011-05-13 17:15 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2011-05-13 11:04 [ath9k-devel] MCS16-MCS19 HGI Alex Hacker
2011-05-13 11:48 ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-05-13 13:45 ` Alex Hacker
2011-05-13 17:15 ` Alex Hacker
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.