From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:46535 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754068Ab2EVRBh (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 May 2012 13:01:37 -0400 Received: from [192.168.100.111] (firewall.candelatech.com [70.89.124.249]) (authenticated bits=0) by ns3.lanforge.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id q4MH1aIR029404 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 22 May 2012 10:01:36 -0700 Message-ID: <4FBBC670.1090200@candelatech.com> (sfid-20120522_190141_288397_12D2E291) Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:01:36 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Any known reasons for ath9k being slow to send to AP? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: We had a report where some smart-phone running iperf was significantly faster than an i7 system running ath9k when sending TCP traffic to an AP. For receiving traffic FROM the AP, the i7/ath9k box was equally fast or a bit faster. Are there any known issues with ath9k sending (maybe incomplete MPDU logic or similar)? Kernel was 3.3.4+. Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com