Return-path: Received: from parez.praha12.net ([78.108.102.1]:35414 "EHLO parez.praha12.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752321AbZLZRzp (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Dec 2009 12:55:45 -0500 From: =?utf-8?q?Luk=C3=A1=C5=A1_Turek?= <8an@praha12.net> Reply-To: 8an@praha12.net To: =?utf-8?q?=E6=B5=B7=E8=97=BB=E6=95=AC=E4=B9=8B?= Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH 4/5] ath5k: Reimplement clock rate to usec conversion Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2009 18:55:38 +0100 Cc: ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <4B32B76D.3090508@thinktube.com> In-Reply-To: <4B32B76D.3090508@thinktube.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart3838743.Ctjo2bnkjL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Message-Id: <200912261855.42408.8an@praha12.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --nextPart3838743.Ctjo2bnkjL Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On 24.12.2009 01:35 =E6=B5=B7=E8=97=BB=E6=95=AC=E4=B9=8B wrote: > ( sorry again for my last post which was corrupted. I do not why... some > coding issue.. please be patient. ) =46or some reason your client tries to send the mail in UTF-16 instead of U= TF-8,=20 so mailserver cuts the mail at the zero byte in the first character of=20 message body. > My work did not include "coverage class". I just applied [3/5], [4/5]. > Before applying [4/5], ath5k_hw_clocktoh() takes care of 11a but 11g/b, > and your new ath5k_he_get_clockrate() handles both 11a and 11b/g, correct= ? > Therefore, I thought this can make difference in throughput. am I wrong > on this point ? But ath5k_hw_get_clockrate() is just a dead code until [5/5] is applied, an= d=20 even after applying [5/5] it's only called on set_coverage() path, so it=20 couldn't make any difference in your case. > 3Mbps/TCP is so low, isn't it ? how long is it between the two nodes ? It's 3 megabytes per seconds, not megabits, as reported by wget. I haven't= =20 done any real throughput test with iperf yet, so your results might be more= =20 correct, but they shouldn't depend on my patches. Lukas Turek --nextPart3838743.Ctjo2bnkjL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJLNk4eAAoJEEBjvk/UOfYwJw8QALvune0TG6aozsN3HH24qUZl 9NR17n1HYpZLu6RTCwEgYQFzbZAMtWzyFvvabesmfsFjIXqTmNnvRflRM7Ju1Wa0 Zyn98+EGiu2/Cg2ZPCn8IS2Vk41nD/t5SyMQo2ZzLqWO458jvDqs/LXKVoMHEFhB YA2d79rFWI2cT/sfn84ZXaj7gr4gPW+rsEDNbpFRxGFYNKMnVB3fYd/copuA/Ig0 74ZgJ/Dvq1telKRf9yq2hIv6WX3F0d8CX1ICPxQmzyOexPzv/MWUyAEo5Z/3J4oP MecVrPNpsXQqQBIlQDIpt4kEIVzkCFG3EFbvcxEcdGzdnZXnWb3p2tFVbVoRH1mX a8rCsl2z0AkXLtA5kWvZaf4tHXF2iWvds8CMVVnuc2xtdwCeCdWPwRozbOaB4kcp aRrDyTWMxjxgmby3/wk2yatfdK3e0CzKrdWT6V78h0BhC4TLwxQ0z3t8Gq7tvAok o85jvIOA6Ah5M2K/z443XsQJQTc79JDypSZAHDW+lxsbwTA0T1hOfkUhvt5dxOoB XRkhrXaW9RqfCUximLLfcADEyHHkSL1KUQhGZf52xsfDpr/hHlE5PF46TsbERTdM szYxq7eu+/OmhVO0lJHPhBx+IQKrEL7gE7WEXW/5SR87YuGJNS7n2rt1gZovquPz RAyTXxmMd4j9mPIoVZUV =d9qp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart3838743.Ctjo2bnkjL--