On Tuesday 18 December 2007 01:24:07 Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> 2007/12/17, bruno randolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > hi nick!
> >
> > thanks for the explanations, that makes it a bit more transparent how you
> > figure that stuff out...
> >
> > On Monday 17 December 2007 15:02:05 Nick Kossifidis wrote:
> > > Bruno can you redo this dump with 802.11b link (CCK) ? It might be
> > > easier to spot what these registers do (and verify if i'm right about
> > > the part that disables ofdm weak signal detection).
> >
> > sure! here you go:
> > http://br1.einfach.org/ath/ani2.tgz
> >
> > - traces of a 5212 in b and g mode. it also includes traces from 5414 in
> > all modes (a, b, g). all done in adhoc mode using the current HAL
> > (0.9.30.13).
> >
> > please bear in mind that turning ANI on and off has resulted in different
> > experiences in different setups: turning it *off*, i.e. no ANI has been
> > reported to work very well and improve thruput in point-to-point links in
> > a countryside environment, and also in my lab tests using 2 nodes next to
> > each other thruput increases (11M -> 20M).
> >
> > other people report that turning ANI *off* results in bad performance in
> > urban and multihop environments, especially with omnidirectional
> > antennas. that kind of makes sense, but it's not really clear (yet?) what
> > the other factors are. in any case it would be good to have the option to
> > use ANI or not.
> >
> > bruno
>
> Dumps are the same for b and g, did you use iwpriv ath0 mode 2 to force b
> mode ?
hi nick!
interresting, the dumps for 5414 b/g don't differ in the relevant parts
('5414_new_adhoc_b.txt' and '5414_new_adhoc_g.txt') but the ones for 5212 do
differ, imho ('new_adhoc_b.txt' and 'new_adhoc_g.txt'). i just re-did the
5414 dumps, with the same results, to make sure i didn't make a mistake. of
course i used iwpriv ath0 mode 2 to force b mode.
bruno
_______________________________________________
ath5k-devel mailing list
ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org
https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
