Re: [ath9k-devel] Question about ath9k signal strength (AP mode)

2010-07-10 Thread Peter Stuge
Lars Hardy wrote:
 I have tried with 2 different Atheros chipset in AP mode, the AR5416
 and AR9280. dd-wrt gives a stronger signal with both chipsets
 compared with openwrt.
 
 I know the ath9k is under development, so my question is if this is
 known by the development team and therefor will be worked on?

I continue to have problems with ath9k and development is slower than
I first expected since Atheros seems to have very limited focus on
support, and only for the very latest generation hardware. (I wish
they made this fact more clear.) Community resources are of course
also limited, but great improvements have been made to ath9k by
members of the OpenWRT community and I guess they will continue their
work.

Without looking much at the code, but following this list for half a
year, my gut feeling is that there is still too much major work
required on ath9k at this point for fine tuning such as signal
strength optimization to come up on the agenda in the near future..


//Peter
___
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel


Re: [ath9k-devel] Question about ath9k signal strength (AP mode)

2010-07-10 Thread Felix Fietkau
On 2010-07-11 3:37 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
 Lars Hardy wrote:
 I have tried with 2 different Atheros chipset in AP mode, the AR5416
 and AR9280. dd-wrt gives a stronger signal with both chipsets
 compared with openwrt.
 
 I know the ath9k is under development, so my question is if this is
 known by the development team and therefor will be worked on?
 
 I continue to have problems with ath9k and development is slower than
 I first expected since Atheros seems to have very limited focus on
 support, and only for the very latest generation hardware. (I wish
 they made this fact more clear.) Community resources are of course
 also limited, but great improvements have been made to ath9k by
 members of the OpenWRT community and I guess they will continue their
 work.
 
 Without looking much at the code, but following this list for half a
 year, my gut feeling is that there is still too much major work
 required on ath9k at this point for fine tuning such as signal
 strength optimization to come up on the agenda in the near future..
I disagree. The major work has been done and hardware support has mostly
caught up with Atheros' own codebase. What's missing is debugging work
and fine tuning - and other than that, maybe a few things that aren't
very hardware specific.

- Felix
___
ath9k-devel mailing list
ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org
https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel