2009/10/20 海藻敬之 <tka...@thinktube.com>: > Hi, Ignacy and all > >> So it seems that there's something wrong with the way the ath5k receives the >> frames, independently of the mode (or so it appears). >> >> Something to do with the noise floor calibration perhaps? > My results also agrees to this conclusion. > In my case, ath5k_tasklet_rx() shows packet receptions were failed > due to AR5K_RXERR_CRC error when 54M and 48Mbps rate is > selected at the sender side. > > I am looking at the patch "ath5k: use noise calibration from madwifi hal" > which Bob posted a week before, but have not tried it yet.
I doubt it will make a huge difference, but feel free to try. Question: did this work much better with a previous kernel, or does it just perform poorly in all kernels tried? Also, how far apart are the nodes in the network? Note ath5k compared to madwifi does not have automatic noise immunity so it is expected to perform somewhat poorly at higher rates. -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com _______________________________________________ ath5k-devel mailing list ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
