Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.214.46]:47625 "EHLO mail-bw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751433Ab0GURH6 convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jul 2010 13:07:58 -0400 Received: by bwz1 with SMTP id 1so354930bwz.19 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 10:07:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20100721133320.GB2355@tuxdriver.com> References: <1279572443-14361-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <20100721133320.GB2355@tuxdriver.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:07:56 +0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] rtl8180: improve signal reporting for rtl8185 hardware From: Pauli Nieminen To: "John W. Linville" Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 4:33 PM, John W. Linville wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 08:08:41AM +0300, Pauli Nieminen wrote: >> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 11:47 PM, John W. Linville >> wrote: >> > The existing code seemed to be somewhat based on the datasheet, but >> > varied substantially from the vendor-provided driver. ?This mirrors the >> > handling of the rtl8185 case from that driver, but still neglects the >> > specifics for the rtl8180 hardware. ?Those details are a bit muddled... >> > >> > Signed-off-by: John W. Linville >> > --- >> > ?drivers/net/wireless/rtl818x/rtl8180_dev.c | ? 11 ++++++++--- >> > ?1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> I tested this version of patch. Patch didn't apply cleanly for some >> reason even tough when I mnauly typed it diff looks same. > > Please try the v2 version of the patch. ?Some "back of the envelope" > math suggests that the v2 version of the patch will give numbers more > to your liking. > > John > -- > John W. Linville ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Someday the world will need a hero, and you > linville@tuxdriver.com ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?might be all we have. ?Be ready. > But version 2 doesn't change the fact that driver is going to report same signal strength even tough I know that only one wifi should have 100 % strength and others less than 50 %. There is only one router in same room with me and all others routers are a lot more father away. So driver is either reading wrong bits from hardware or my hardware is broken.