linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>
To: wwguy <wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com>
Cc: Intel Linux Wireless <ilw@linux.intel.com>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT] iwl3945: use software scanning by default
Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 07:45:18 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110209064517.GE2184@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1297180207.20613.41.camel@wwguy-ubuntu>

On Tue, Feb 08, 2011 at 07:50:07AM -0800, wwguy wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 05:36 -0800, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > Looking for some more testing and opinions.
> > 
> > Patch fixes:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=671366
> > and probably some other "very poor performance" bugs reported
> > elsewhere.
> > 
> > Sometimes after hardware scanning device is unable to receive frames
> > at higher rate, what cause that very slow speed is observed by the users.
> > 
> > To workaround problem we can use software scanning. Patch remove
> > "deprecated" warning and make sw scan be used by default on 3945.
> > 
> > On older kernels, in particular 2.6.35, software scanning does not
> > fix problem. On my setup, not affected by bug, I can see slow speed
> > with software scans on 2.6.35 as well. I'm not quite sure why. Anyway
> > on upstream patch works good for me and bug reporter.

[snip]

> > -MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_hw_scan,
> > -		 "disable hardware scanning (default 0) (deprecated)");
> > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_hw_scan, "disable hardware scanning (default 1)");
> >  module_param_named(fw_restart3945, iwl3945_mod_params.restart_fw, int, S_IRUGO);
> >  MODULE_PARM_DESC(fw_restart3945, "restart firmware in case of error");
> >  
> 
> don't have much experience with 3945, but not sure setting sw scan by
> default is the right choice?

Definitely hw scan is bad choice for some users.

I'll will provide patch for some more users to test, to see if
it not causing regression. On my laptop with iwl3945 it works
well with upstream kernel and bad with 2.6.35.

I'm not quite sure, why sw scaning improved currently.
I thought commit df13cce53a7b28a81460e6bfc4857e9df4956141
"mac80211: Improve software scan timing" fix things, but that
commit is also on 2.6.35 .

Stanislaw


  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-09  6:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-08 13:36 [RFC/RFT] iwl3945: use software scanning by default Stanislaw Gruszka
2011-02-08 15:50 ` wwguy
2011-02-09  6:45   ` Stanislaw Gruszka [this message]
2011-02-14 12:08 ` Johannes Berg
2011-02-14 12:40   ` Stanislaw Gruszka

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=20110209064517.GE2184@redhat.com \
    --to=sgruszka@redhat.com \
    --cc=ilw@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=wey-yi.w.guy@intel.com \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).