On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 11:47 -0700, Daniel Halperin wrote: > >> [341398.950019] iwlagn 0000:03:00.0: iwlagn_tx_agg_start on ra = > >> 00:16:ea:c3:b3:8e tid = 0 > >> [341401.790964] New seq exceeds buffering window: 2335, 2304 > > > > So the delta is always 31, it seems? Is iwlwifi consistently sending > > batches of 32 instead of the advertised 31? > > I don't think that's the case, in fact I've never seen the hardware > send a larger batch than frame limit. Ok. > I think it's from a missed > frame early in one batch being pushed out by a late frame in the next > batch. Ok, yeah, that'd have the same effect. > I know how to get the logs to find out. I have a bunch of > meetings soon, but I'll dig into this more later. Thanks. > > Also -- don't get confused, the tx_agg_start is on its own TX agg > > session, but the new seq stuff is on its RX agg session. > > You're absolutely true; but both sides pretty much start and stop > aggregation in sync, they both have the same timeouts and I'm only > using tcp traffic which is bidirectional. They're running the same > software on the same hardware, modulo one being an AP and one a > client. Right, if you have bidi traffic like TCP iwlwifi's way of starting/stopping aggregation will be in sync. > [Yes, I know that AP mode is broken on the iwl5300 but I disable power > save, etc., and it seems to work well enough ... Actually, does AP > (not P2P) mode work properly on the P2P-supporting 6300? I could > switch to using those.] Yeah, but I wouldn't worry about it in your case right now -- the only broken thing that I know of is all about powersave. johannes -- 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
