Andi Kleen wrote: > Ok, but I see the same thing with two different cards, with different > chipsets (RaLink and RealTek). You think they both have that problem? Yes, I think that's not unlikely. >> Maybe we can see more if you provide some minstrel stats after >> you've pushed more traffic through the link - 25-50 packets is not >> nearly enough for getting an accurate view of how good the link is. >> Try to push through a few megabytes of data... > > Here are the statistics after a few MB. > > rate throughput ewma prob this prob this succ/attempt success attempts > TtP 1 0.9 97.9 100.0 1( 1) 19284 21249 > 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 101 > 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 104 > 11 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 253 397 > 6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 103 > 9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 106 > 12 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 107 > 18 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 104 > 24 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 111 > 36 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 120 > 48 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 179 > 54 0.0 0.0 0.0 0( 0) 0 253 > > Total packet count:: ideal 9023 lookaround 474 According to the rate control's view, only the 1M has a usable success probability. It's rather insteresting that 11M is the only other rate that had some successes. With this kind of results, the only two options that I can think of are either a systematic tx status reporting error (false negative for the IEEE80211_TX_STAT_ACK flag), or something PHY related. I think the latter is more likely. - Felix -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
