From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp-rs1-vallila2.fe.helsinki.fi ([128.214.173.75]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1Ze6Pg-0000zy-1j for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:06:09 +0000 Subject: Re: QCA6164 in Fedora References: <55E8ED93.4040504@fedoraproject.org> <55F0D35F.9040704@fedoraproject.org> <55F0DBD9.4090505@fedoraproject.org> From: Susi Lehtola Message-ID: <56005500.9030303@fedoraproject.org> Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:05:36 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Kazior Cc: "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" On 09/21/2015 12:18 AM, Michal Kazior wrote: > On 10 September 2015 at 03:24, Susi Lehtola > wrote: >> On 09/09/2015 05:48 PM, Susi Lehtola wrote: >>> >>> I can confirm the card works with the linux-next tree, using a snapshot >>> I took today. >> >> >> However, the card only seems to make a 1Mbps connection in the same >> situation where my old laptop made a 55Mbps one... > > How did you measure this? `iw` tool reports invalid tx bitrate for > ath10k due to firmware limitation. Did you test the actual performance > (iperf/wget)? Is it downlink or uplink? Are both as bad? This was the link speed reported by NetworkManager. But yes, actual performance is much better, seeing 2.2 MB/sec is not uncommon [the internet connection is pretty slow]. -- Susi Lehtola Fedora Project Contributor jussilehtola@fedoraproject.org _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k