From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qk1-f172.google.com (mail-qk1-f172.google.com [209.85.222.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 336CF273CA for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 12:33:02 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="LaUhV0bu" Received: by mail-qk1-f172.google.com with SMTP id af79cd13be357-7789577b53fso274848085a.3 for ; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 05:33:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1698150781; x=1698755581; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+6Qe+ey4ZmpsSUeZVmZ0VQQuTniuqNzcRAPwWX/hLSk=; b=LaUhV0buFsjUkBc2koeXtApihI7ISQVjRm7/ZFZvTiOR3DcMZZq1jF9NYja3zqOOM0 MEAjCN8upY1RJnwTgtpwzQBLlsc9AtYbs0yyVabcFgJ6vKTqBNvC2QXvEPwFLaZO5enB eE8O5J+hU54hzSkRsRqidavPAmWoQyJs8Z8G7pqF50Bi+MUXPL4qdwyasAwPR6nv+KsT YFMS/knOG/PpPbu/y/h2j34HCvk9eVVMaEmiRiTskPxx3+DnIql2njX6Y5Xf6VLqEpbG NGt0w4udYVTg2XJtD/bvc7/jlTXlHR2/Avkoy8Ji6qBKZHQYJbS7ZVFsjZtbnwSJ9TwS kaMA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1698150781; x=1698755581; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=+6Qe+ey4ZmpsSUeZVmZ0VQQuTniuqNzcRAPwWX/hLSk=; b=iH1pUIfcYlPBQvRkRIvKSib1t6bnpE/FkV2zrROQDinnNw2N0mbvHoEwz7G0M/uXJq TWNGQNMFhT/EF01LRAZt1MgHo5MA2y3Mumfg+xOX55FlaZhf+lvAK4Mwo+FqAFym3ngc /U980KUu/Sa4fD/R5tXunBe+LmZFQN4XaN6ZY6mjMwz0lCO7l09cjsjbbowTO/WZPFad 09U4V8M1MXy2qHgCfpgYkAgeN1O7EuwBAXUZP40hwdpJPuAtKSx1iR49BRde1M3uFaAk V3KP+ayL297cgOv7B3dPb3GxeRPoki4RklwLm8BtDV2IBeKcg+Fp/fJqb1s8+O4k+f1V nvRA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxY4Wt+U14niKejKwBY2tW1nRgqgA/Pw3YqoJ7XaIzOJK8NiT2A /IHDP/NLg2gibzn19zzm7e4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFf7VOB7hrLvDIJh7xKoiBjZOr1nVslm3cyVyWl3t/XweRBWIaKWRCEYVp9mfpHymqsFcl3TA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:3193:b0:778:b3fa:e0cf with SMTP id bi19-20020a05620a319300b00778b3fae0cfmr12304525qkb.40.1698150781329; Tue, 24 Oct 2023 05:33:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.102.4.159] (50-78-19-50-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [50.78.19.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id br11-20020a05620a460b00b0077412ca0ae1sm3400542qkb.65.2023.10.24.05.33.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 24 Oct 2023 05:33:00 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9e12bf94-aa83-4fe6-b045-8dab45b264ae@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 05:32:58 -0700 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iwd@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Is the data rate estimation for 5GHz channels overly pessimistic? Content-Language: en-US To: Denis Kenzior , Simonas Kazlauskas Cc: iwd@lists.linux.dev References: <5780e1b2-8956-46bb-8116-b513cc564cea@gmail.com> <5ff58310-c5ee-4694-821a-0c802cdedb89@gmail.com> <05aedfe6-82ad-4e41-a9fa-e9f8a5619947@gmail.com> <30b6dad4-64b2-41ca-8712-053cb1396eaf@gmail.com> <29094eca-dcf8-4234-8afc-13d37db8450c@gmail.com> From: James Prestwood In-Reply-To: <29094eca-dcf8-4234-8afc-13d37db8450c@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi Denis/Simonas, > > Now the question is, how do we make sure iwd is estimating the HE rate > if available?  Also, how do we tweak the estimation logic with > sensitivity numbers (obtained from a spec sheet, or through > experimentation) for specific hardware being used. Trying to catalog different hardware performance and act on it for ranking is an impossible task :) The only simple solution I can think of would be to add a user-option for some threshold RSSI in the rate calculation. If set and the RSSI is below the lowest of ht_vht_he_base_rssi just use the last index (-82) (and maybe force a 20MHz channel width?). This would at least let the rate logic return _something_, albeit maybe not accurate. But again, those RSSI thresholds were sorta made up anyways :) So you could set: [Rank].LowSignalRateThreshold=-90 Any RSSI between -82 and -90 would use -82 for the rank calculation. No idea how this would play out in practice, but its at least simple and not tied to any given hardware. Thanks, James > > Regards, > -Denis