Return-path: Received: from mail-yx0-f174.google.com ([209.85.213.174]:63724 "EHLO mail-yx0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751632Ab1KNPIs (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:08:48 -0500 Received: by yenr9 with SMTP id r9so5227564yen.19 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 07:08:47 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4EBEA616.2020002@01019freenet.de> References: <4EBEA616.2020002@01019freenet.de> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 16:08:47 +0100 Message-ID: (sfid-20111114_160851_422242_B096C5AC) Subject: Re: Try to narrow down the problem with rt2800usb and rt3572 based USB WLAN devices From: Helmut Schaa To: Andreas Hartmann Cc: users@rt2x00.serialmonkey.com, "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Nov 12, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > Could anybody please try to explain this behavior, or even better, fix > it (it looks really broken to me)? AFAIK it is possible to aggregate multiple frames into one URB for rt2800 USB devices. However, rt2800usb doesn't make use of this yet while the legacy driver does. However, I don't think that this is the cause for the poor performance you see ... Helmut