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