From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:48891 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752166Ab1C1LkR convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2011 07:40:17 -0400 Received: by fxm17 with SMTP id 17so2552701fxm.19 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 04:40:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Helmut Schaa To: Johannes Berg Subject: Re: Aggregation problem with rt2800 AP and Intel 5100 STA Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 13:38:26 +0200 Cc: Emmanuel Grumbach , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <201103232358.29966.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> <201103251355.55824.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> <1301058415.20631.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1301058415.20631.1.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <201103281338.26627.helmut.schaa@googlemail.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Am Freitag, 25. März 2011 schrieb Johannes Berg: > On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 13:55 +0100, Helmut Schaa wrote: > > > So far the tx status as returned by the device look correct. I printed the > > sequence numbers of failed AMPDU subframes and had a second device capturing > > the traffic and compared them. JFI, it seems indeed as if the tx status reporting in rt2800 is not 100% accurate [1]. Not sure if this is really the culprit but it looks feasible. Helmut [1] http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/pipermail/users_rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/2011-March/003456.html