From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail2.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.173]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1YoDqT-0003uw-He for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 01 May 2015 16:31:22 +0000 Message-ID: <5543AA43.7050106@candelatech.com> Date: Fri, 01 May 2015 09:30:59 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: Which Firmware to use for STA (999.x crashes...) References: <5543A152.5050801@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: richard mayers Cc: ath10k@lists.infradead.org On 05/01/2015 09:21 AM, richard mayers wrote: > Sorry for not providing details, I wanted to focus more in the > firmware crash. Therefore you recommend me to use the Candela > firmware. If I just want to run throughput, delay, and fairness > measurements do you think is okay not using the kernel provided by > them ?. You mean firmware not provided by them? I'd be happy to see comparisons between my CT firmware and others, but if official firmware just crashes, then I guess you cannot do that. If you can crash CT firmware, let me know...I have a chance of fixing it. I have no chance of fixing upstream firmware, but maybe you can get some help from QCA folks. With UDP, we often see > 700Mbps throughput, but most of these types of tests we do in isolation chambers cabled up. Over-the-air is probably more like 600Mbps in a clean environment. You typically have to increase kernel socket buffers to get best throughput, and CPU on the host starts to matter at those speeds as well. Antenna matter a lot...just play around with it. Thanks, Ben > > Anyway, for the throughput I do as follows: > > Tool : Iperf. (iperf -c server_ip -b 1000M -i 1) > Protocol : UDP > Channel : Over the air, with three antennas. > AP: hostapd, channel 149, 80Mhz. With the same kernel, driver, > firmware, and NIC than the Station. > STA: I get the maximum throughput with MCS = 5/6, when I go further to > 7-9 the throughput drops dramatically to 50Mbit/s. > > I think the antennas should be separated each other 12 cm, I am wrong > ? can this have a high impact on the throughput ? > > Richard > > 2015-05-01 17:52 GMT+02:00 Ben Greear : >> Candela firmware should work just fine for stations. >> >> And, when reporting throughput, you should also provide details >> about how you tested (tool, protocol, over-the-air or not, AP >> involved, etc). >> >> Thanks, >> Ben >> >> >> On 05/01/2015 08:38 AM, richard mayers wrote: >>> Hi everyone! >>> >>> I need to do some 802.11ac measurements. For that I am using the >>> Compex wle900vx. >>> >>> I had a set up in which everything was working quite well, however I >>> had a maximum throughput of 380Mbits/s ( with all the debug options >>> enabled ) >>> >>> In this first set up I had been using ubuntu 14.04 LTS, kernel version >>> 3.16, for the driver I used the latest stable backport (3.19) and >>> finally as a firmware the commercial firmware from Candela Tech >>> (latest version) in both the AP and STA. >>> >>> However, I read in the wiki that the latest firmware version for AP is >>> the 10.2.4.48, and the Stations should use 999.999.0.63. For this >>> second set up I changed almost everything: >>> >>> - Upgraded kernel to 4.0.1 >>> - Backported drivers from the git Modinfo output -> (backported from >>> Linux (v3.2-rc1-243765-ga2ff7c6) using backports >>> backports-20150424-2-g982) >>> >>> AP : 10.2.4.48 firmware >>> STA : Following the wiki : 999.999.0.63 >>> >>> During boot the firmware is loaded without any problem: >>> >>> ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: qca988x hw2.0 (0x4100016c, 0x043202ff) fw >>> 999.999.0.636 api 2 htt 2.1 wmi 1 cal otp max_sta 16 >>> >>> However when I associate with the AP, the firmware crashes. >>> >>> [11831.954992] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: firmware crashed! (uuid n/a) >>> [11831.955031] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: qca988x hw2.0 (0x4100016c, >>> 0x043202ff) fw 999.999.0.636 api 2 htt 2.1 wmi 1 cal otp max_sta 16 >>> [11831.955039] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: debug 0 debugfs 0 tracing 0 >>> dfs 0 testmode 0 >>> [11831.957059] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: firmware register dump: >>> [11831.957068] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [00]: 0x4100016C 0x00000000 >>> 0x009C4521 0x00000000 >>> [11831.957076] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [04]: 0x009C4521 0x00060530 >>> 0x00000019 0x00955A00 >>> [11831.957084] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [08]: 0x00306862 0x00000000 >>> 0x0040CC94 0x00000020 >>> [11831.957091] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [12]: 0x00000000 0x00000000 >>> 0x00958360 0x0095836B >>> [11831.957098] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [16]: 0x80991091 0x0040AD94 >>> 0x0043155C 0x00000000 >>> [11831.957106] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [20]: 0x0000FFFF 0x00000000 >>> 0x0043155C 0x00000000 >>> [11831.957114] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [24]: 0x809A0978 0x0040AD94 >>> 0x00439484 0xC1A18834 >>> [11831.957121] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [28]: 0x809AD1A2 0x0040ADE4 >>> 0x00439484 0x0043FB1C >>> [11831.957129] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [32]: 0x809B35A3 0x0000001A >>> 0x00440A50 0x0000000E >>> [11831.957136] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [36]: 0x00000000 0x00000000 >>> 0x00000000 0x00000000 >>> [11831.957143] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [40]: 0x00000000 0x00000000 >>> 0x00000000 0x00000094 >>> [11831.957151] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [44]: 0x00439DC8 0x00000000 >>> 0x00000000 0x00400000 >>> [11831.957158] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [48]: 0x809AE0B4 0x0040AE04 >>> 0x00400000 0x0043FB1C >>> [11831.957166] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [52]: 0x00000001 0x00000000 >>> 0x00423410 0x00400000 >>> [11831.957173] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: [56]: 0x809AE17E 0x0040AE44 >>> 0x0040FE6C 0x0040D310 >>> [11832.046908] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: failed to synchronize monitor >>> vdev 1 stop: -108 >>> [11832.046915] ath10k_pci 0000:0c:00.0: failed to stop monitor vdev: -108 >>> >>> I have seen that in the past a lot of people had problems with this >>> firmware but since years have passed maybe the way of solving have >>> evolved. >>> >>> Apart from that I also got the 00:03:07:12:34:56 MAC address issue. >>> >>> Any ideas guys? Should I use the candelatech firmware for the stations ? >>> Richard >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ath10k mailing list >>> ath10k@lists.infradead.org >>> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k >>> >> >> >> -- >> Ben Greear >> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com >> > -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k