Return-path: Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:44934 "EHLO mail-ob0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751176Ab2H2FFX (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Aug 2012 01:05:23 -0400 Received: by obbuo13 with SMTP id uo13so276126obb.19 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 22:05:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <503D14FF.5000309@candelatech.com> References: <503D14FF.5000309@candelatech.com> Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 10:35:22 +0530 Message-ID: (sfid-20120829_070604_945838_2BAD1543) Subject: Re: Does ath9k support beam forming? From: Mohammed Shafi To: Ben Greear Cc: "ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi Ben, On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 12:29 AM, Ben Greear wrote: > I saw some RFC patches about beam-forming from 2010, but grepping current > code doesn't find anything that indicates these patches ever made it > upstream. > Of course, I could be looking for the wrong thing... i think even though the patches are ready for submission, I think the testing them proved to be very challenging, where there does not seems to be consistent improvement(if not decrease) in throughput. I can be wrong. > > Does the current ath9k code support beam-forming? no. hopefully we can support them(yet we need some considerable amount of time to test i suppose). > > Thanks, > Ben > > -- > Ben Greear > Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- thanks, shafi