All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
Subject: [ath9k-devel] why is bitrate of 65.0 MBit/s MCS 7 appropriate for signal strength of -93 dBm?
Date: Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:52:17 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4D9C7E21.8090805@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTi=ekCBmDiwG4EZMkE9+i-bZTiUYMQ@mail.gmail.com>

On 2011-04-06 4:49 PM, Larry Vaden wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 9:31 AM, Felix Fietkau<nbd@openwrt.org>  wrote:
>>>  So, why is 65.0 MBit/s MCS 7 even on the table if rate control is based on
>>>  PER?
>>
>>  Because the assumption that lower rates always work better than higher rates
>>  is a bad one to make in a rate control algorithm.
>
> I do not disagree.  I've seen plenty of cases where higher data rates
> are more successful than lower data rates.
>
> Is XR within the range of parameters tried by ath9k?
No. It's not even supported by the hardware.

>>  You can find better statistics with much more meaningful output in
>>  /sys/kernel/debug/ieee80211/phy0/netdev:wlan0/stations/*/rc_stats
>
> I'm not sure about the time domain covered by said stats as IIRC at
> least 3 hours of 'iperf' has been run since r26494 was installed.
>
> best regards/ldv
>
> root at OpenWrt:~# cat
> /sys/kernel/debug/ieee80211/phy0/netdev:wlan0/stations/*/rc_stats
> type      rate     throughput  ewma prob   this prob  this
> succ/attempt   success    attempts
> HT20/LGI TtPMCS0        1.7       28.2       33.3          0(  0)
>     34         193
> HT20/LGI    MCS1        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS2        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS3        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
> HT20/LGI    MCS4        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS5        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
> HT20/LGI    MCS6        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS7        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
> HT20/LGI    MCS8        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS9        0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS10       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS11       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
> HT20/LGI    MCS12       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS13       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           0
> HT20/LGI    MCS14       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
> HT20/LGI    MCS15       0.0        0.0        0.0          0(  0)
>      0           1
>
> Total packet count::    ideal 34      lookaround 6
The total packet count indicates that there's no useful data in there 
(probably because a reconnect happened). The MCS7 rate that you saw was 
maybe just a probing attempt.

- Felix

  reply	other threads:[~2011-04-06 14:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-04-06  9:58 [ath9k-devel] why is bitrate of 65.0 MBit/s MCS 7 appropriate for signal strength of -93 dBm? Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 10:26 ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-06 14:17   ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 14:31     ` Felix Fietkau
2011-04-06 14:49       ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 14:52         ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2011-04-06 14:53           ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 23:33           ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-07  7:36             ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-07  7:37               ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-07 12:29               ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-07 15:33                 ` Daniel Halperin
2011-04-07 16:29                   ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-08  0:22                     ` Adrian Chadd
2011-04-08  0:33                       ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-08  0:35                       ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-08  0:41                         ` Adrian Chadd
2011-04-08  1:03                           ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 14:48     ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-06 14:51       ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 14:59         ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-06 15:18           ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-06 16:02             ` Mohammed Shafi
2011-04-06 16:08             ` Daniel Halperin
2011-04-06 16:24               ` Larry Vaden
2011-04-07 22:25   ` Larry Vaden

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4D9C7E21.8090805@openwrt.org \
    --to=nbd@openwrt.org \
    --cc=ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
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.