From: Gabor Juhos <juhosg@openwrt.org>
To: Daniel Halperin <dhalperi@cs.washington.edu>
Cc: "John W. Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
"ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" <ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] ath9k: use consistent value for REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_THREE_CHAIN
Date: Sun, 15 Apr 2012 19:21:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F8B03B4.8090501@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALSq=BYgJ-bawvPPb7bcqL2XXQjA8=j3irdr6h41C-G7CE3C=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Dan,
Thank you for the comments.
> (Failed to reply-all originally, sorry:)
>
> Erm...
>
> On Sat, Apr 14, 2012 at 1:01 PM, Gabor Juhos <juhosg@openwrt.org> wrote:
>>
>> In eeprom_def.c and in ar9003_eeprom.c the value
>> of the symbol is 9, however the comments in these
>> files indicates the value should be 10*log10(3)*2
>> which is 9.54242509439325. Replace the the value
>> to 10 in these files.
>
> So the truncated constant is off by a quarter-dB for 9 or for 10. Do
> the chips care one way or the other? (For comparison, Intel uses 4.5
> dB, i.e. 9 in this notation, to mean "divide-by-3". That's what ath9k
> has now).
In my understanding the value is not related to the chip. It is used for
per-chain tx power reduction, in order to ensure regulatory compliance. Using 10
instead of 9 means that the overall tx power will be lower.
> Are you making it consistent with some other file that's not mentioned
> here? If not, why?
I'm tyring to make it consistent between ar9003_eeprom.c, eeprom_def.c and
eeprom_9287.c. The first two files uses 9, whereas eeprom_9287 uses 10.
Considering Felix's comment, I will update the patch and will use 9 instead of
10. Although that will replace the value in eeprom_9287.c, but that should not
cause problems, because the AR9287 does not supports 3x3.
>> #define REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_TWO_CHAIN 6 /* 10*log10(2)*2 */
>> -#define REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_THREE_CHAIN 9 /* 10*log10(3)*2 */
>> +#define REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_THREE_CHAIN 10 /* 10*log10(3)*2 */
>> #define PWRINCR_3_TO_1_CHAIN 9 /* 10*log(3)*2 */
>
> Why only change one of two 9s to a 10? Why not also PWRINCR_3_TO_1_CHAIN?
The PWRINCR_* symbols are not used anywhere and should be removed.
-Gabor
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-15 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-14 20:01 [PATCH 1/3] ath9k: use consistent value for REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_THREE_CHAIN Gabor Juhos
2012-04-14 20:01 ` [PATCH 2/3] ath9k: introduce ath9k_hw_get_scaled_power helper Gabor Juhos
2012-04-14 20:01 ` [PATCH 3/3] ath9k: simplify ath9k_hw_get_scaled_power function Gabor Juhos
2012-04-14 22:11 ` [PATCH 1/3] ath9k: use consistent value for REDUCE_SCALED_POWER_BY_THREE_CHAIN Daniel Halperin
2012-04-15 17:21 ` Gabor Juhos [this message]
2012-04-15 10:31 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-04-15 17:21 ` Gabor Juhos
2012-04-15 17:26 ` Felix Fietkau
2012-04-15 17:50 ` Gabor Juhos
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=4F8B03B4.8090501@openwrt.org \
--to=juhosg@openwrt.org \
--cc=ath9k-devel@venema.h4ckr.net \
--cc=dhalperi@cs.washington.edu \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.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).