On 21.12.2009 11:26 海藻敬之 wrote: > Didn't we have to handle CHANNEL_2GHZ case in > ath5k_hw_write_ofdm_timings() shown below ? The ath5k gives exactly the same results as original Atheros HAL:
#define INIT_CLOCKMHZSCALED 0x64000000 unsigned long clockMhzScaled = INIT_CLOCKMHZSCALED; if (IS_CHAN_TURBO(chan)) clockMhzScaled *= 2; coef_scaled = clockMhzScaled / chan->channel; I don't know how the calculations work, they might be explained in the referenced patent, but I didn't change their semantics at all. > I think we should do. then I made my own patch to hadle it and it > seemed to improve the throughput of 2.4GHz. (even still not as good as > 5Ghz case ) Where's the patch? Lukas Turek
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ ath5k-devel mailing list ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org https://lists.ath5k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath5k-devel
