Return-path: Received: from static-ip-62-75-166-246.inaddr.intergenia.de ([62.75.166.246]:36750 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756953AbXE0VQu (ORCPT ); Sun, 27 May 2007 17:16:50 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: Maximilian Engelhardt Subject: Re: b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend) Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 23:16:06 +0200 Cc: "linux-kernel" , "linux-wireless" , Stephen Hemminger , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jeff Garzik , Gary Zambrano , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton References: <20070525172431.60affaca@freepuppy> <200705272125.25506.maxi@daemonizer.de> <200705272313.33129.mb@bu3sch.de> In-Reply-To: <200705272313.33129.mb@bu3sch.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Message-Id: <200705272316.07338.mb@bu3sch.de> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sunday 27 May 2007 23:13:32 Michael Buesch wrote: > On Sunday 27 May 2007 21:25:17 Maximilian Engelhardt wrote: > > 2.6.21.1: > > [ 5] local 192.168.1.2 port 58414 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 5001 > > [ 5] 0.0-60.6 sec 1.13 MBytes 157 Kbits/sec > > [ 4] local 192.168.1.2 port 5001 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 57837 > > [ 4] 0.0-63.1 sec 2.82 MBytes 375 Kbits/sec > > > 2.6.22-rc3: > > [ 5] local 192.168.1.2 port 46557 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 5001 > > [ 5] 0.0-60.4 sec 58.9 MBytes 8.18 Mbits/sec > > [ 4] local 192.168.1.2 port 5001 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 51633 > > [ 4] 0.0-63.1 sec 7.27 MBytes 967 Kbits/sec > > This is the diff between these two kernels. > I'm not sure why you see a much better TX throughput here. > > Can you re-check to make sure it's not just some test-jitter? Oh, eh, and what I forgot to ask: Do you know an old kernel that works perfectly well for you, so I can look at a diff between this one and anything >=2.6.21.1. -- Greetings Michael.