Return-Path: Subject: Re: [Bluez-users] How to configure a 723kbps connection? From: Marcel Holtmann To: Steven Singer Cc: grpmind+bluez.users@boromir.vpop.net, BlueZ Mailing List In-Reply-To: <403291AD.7080601@csr.com> References: <200402171142.i1HBgRV5023132@mail.holtmann.net> <1077018777.2841.5.camel@pegasus> <40323EC2.8080203@csr.com> <1077037423.2665.72.camel@pegasus> <403291AD.7080601@csr.com> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1077058296.2665.129.camel@pegasus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Errors-To: bluez-users-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 23:51:37 +0100 Hi Steven, > I read Matt's message as that he was asking for confirmation of your > suggestion that the UART baud rate was the most likely limit and that > he should stop wasting his time playing with the packet settings. Given > the information he listed, particularly that the link quality was 255, > I think it's unlikely to be a problem with the Bluetooth link and more > likely to be a problem elsewhere in the system. > > The next few messages in the thread were talking about whether the Zeevo > chip was a bad chip or had a bad link manager. This appears to be > irrelevant as the most likely source of the bandwidth limit is the Ipaq > UART. we know for sure that the 3870 has the problem with a too slow UART, but the 3970 can go with full speed. So I assume that HP won't had this problem with their newer 2xxx generation, but who knows :( > The spec allows the link quality to be tied to anything, but module > manufacturers will be aware that if they don't have at least some > component of the link quality sensitive to whether DH packets are likely > to get through, they're going to get support calls of the form "why am I > getting only 400 kbps but get_link_quality says the link is perfect?" > > However, since the logs Matt gave show him running hcitool to get > the link quality, he must be getting it on the Linux side of the > link which, according to his hciconfig, is a CSR device. > > This tells us that the CSR device is has a BER for received packets > that's low enough for DH5 packets to stream at 700 kbps. However, it > tells us nothing about the BER for packets received at the Ipaq end. > The link may not be symmetric. However, even if the link had switched > to DM5 packets, we'd expect to see 470 kbps. To get 265 kbps the link > would have to be atrocious (> 0.4% BER). I think it's unlikely that > we'd have a 0.4% BER one way and < 0.0025% the other way. Thanks for this explanation. It is good to know how and when the link manager decides what packet types to use ;) > There may be other issues. For example, poor choice of L2CAP MTU > could limit the packet types that are allowed (for example, L2CAP > MTUs sigificantly below 150 could limit the data rate). This would > show up on an HCI trace. An HCI trace would also confirm which profile > was being used for the connection. Matt, please run "hcidump -w " (as root) and post it to the list, so Steven can take a look at it. > It may be that the Ipaq is limited in the rate at which it can process > data. This could cause it to assert UART flow control to the Bluetooth > chip, stalling the data flow. It is possible, because they no longer can use BCSP and have to deal with bit errors on H4. Regards Marcel ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net is sponsored by: Speed Start Your Linux Apps Now. Build and deploy apps & Web services for Linux with a free DVD software kit from IBM. Click Now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1356&alloc_id=3438&op=click _______________________________________________ Bluez-users mailing list Bluez-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-users