On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 04:17 -0700, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 07:13:26AM -0700, wwguy wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 05:33 -0700, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > > > after some time, performance downgrade to unpached driver level, like > > unpatched? > > > > However patch still make better here, since similar test on unpached > > unpatched? > > I'll fix that. > > > > + /* > > > + * force CTS-to-self frames protection if RTS-CTS is not preferred > > > + * one aggregation protection method > > on? > > The sentence is not the best English, but replacing "one" to "on" will > not help, I think. > > > if I remember correctly, the RTS/CTS was added to fix 6000 performance > > issue 2 years ago. Did you see the similar performance downgrade issue > > on other devices beside 5000? > > No, I think only 5000 ware afected (also with random connection hangs). > Patching and using cts-to-self on 6000, give slightly better performance > here with 6300 adapter: > > vanilla 6300 5Ghz: 8.13 8.03 8.13 8.03 8.19 avr 8.1020 std 0.070143 > patched 6300 5Ghz: 8.60 8.59 8.60 8.41 8.57 avr 8.5540 std 0.081425 > > vanilla 6300 2GHz: 4.06 4.39 4.60 4.70 4.80 avr 4.5100 std 0.293770 > patched 6300 2GHz: 4.94 4.90 4.94 5.05 4.88 avr 4.9420 std 0.065727 > > I plan to do more testing, but not yet (except 5000 adapters I have > quite good performance). > Thanks for testing. the patch looks good. Wey -- 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
