From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: Sujith Manoharan <sujith@msujith.org>
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com>,
Paul Stewart <pstew@google.com>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 05:32:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <512EDDC5.7020901@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20782.54505.239733.82364@gargle.gargle.HOWL>
On 2013-02-28 4:54 AM, Sujith Manoharan wrote:
> Felix Fietkau wrote:
>> I don't see the point in keeping that algorithm around. It has known
>> design flaws that make it perform poorly in several scenarios, and
>> fixing some of the flaws require basically rewriting it.
>
> I ran some comparison throughput tests between minstrel_ht and ath9k RC
> and minstrel showed lower numbers (~10Mbps difference). This is in a clean
> environment (OTA). IMO, we can switch the default to minstrel_ht, but keep
> the ath9k RC until the perf. gap is fixed. I think this was Google's concern too,
> a drop in the average throughput. This was in the STA->AP direction.
What was the distance and what was the rate used?
> In the AP->STA direction (AP: DB120, STA: AR9280), the numbers were really low.
> The highest that I could see was ~165 Mbps, while with WNDR3700 (stock FW), the
> average throughput was ~185 Mbps and an occasional high of 190 and above.
Comparing against stock FW (especially with different devices) is not
useful, it could be anything.
- Felix
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-28 4:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-08 13:13 [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 13:30 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:04 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 14:06 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:08 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 16:38 ` Paul Stewart
2013-02-08 16:53 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-27 19:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2013-02-28 2:21 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-02-28 3:24 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-28 3:54 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-28 4:32 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2013-02-28 5:08 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 14:31 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 15:35 ` Ben Greear
2013-03-01 21:23 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 21:28 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-02 2:19 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-02 5:40 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-02 8:26 ` Georgiewskiy Yuriy
2013-03-02 20:23 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-03 3:58 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-28 11:47 ` Bob Copeland
2013-02-28 13:09 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-28 18:53 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-02-28 19:07 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 1:23 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 10:09 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 3:53 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 10:14 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 10:22 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 10:29 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 11:18 ` Mohammed Shafi
2013-03-01 11:31 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 12:32 ` Mohammed Shafi
2013-03-01 13:05 ` Felix Fietkau
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=512EDDC5.7020901@openwrt.org \
--to=nbd@openwrt.org \
--cc=adrian@freebsd.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pstew@google.com \
--cc=rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=sujith@msujith.org \
/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).