Return-path: Received: from mail.freestuffjunction.co.uk ([109.169.51.71]:38487 "EHLO mail.freestuffjunction.co.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751141Ab2KFTgO (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Nov 2012 14:36:14 -0500 Message-ID: <5099669E.2040301@ehuk.net> (sfid-20121106_203626_441621_920D8287) Date: Tue, 06 Nov 2012 19:35:58 +0000 From: Eddie Chapman Reply-To: eddie@ehuk.net MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: stable@vger.kernel.org, florian@reitmeir.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, j@w1.fi Subject: Re: Linux 3.6.5 References: <20121031173811.GA12970@kroah.com> <509575F4.5020109@ehuk.net> <20121105081757.GA3730@kroah.com> <50979D38.6010002@ehuk.net> (sfid-20121105_121423_464154_72561532) <1352116868.9466.2.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <509838F4.4010301@ehuk.net> <1352188621.9440.4.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <50992E0E.3040606@ehuk.net> <1352217244.9440.16.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <50995E25.6080601@ehuk.net> <1352229634.8814.8.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1352229634.8814.8.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/11/12 19:20, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2012-11-06 at 18:59 +0000, Eddie Chapman wrote: >> On 06/11/12 15:54, Johannes Berg wrote: >>> The problem here is that some devices (notably iwlwifi) will not allow >>> (by firmware) to connect to such an AP as HT40- if that is not allowed. >>> So I prevented it generally, but we can make it device dependent. I >>> don't like it much, but I suppose we can do it. Try this patch: >>> >>> http://p.sipsolutions.net/0129f39c7d882289.txt >>> >>> It will still prohibit this configuration when the driver said it's not >>> allowed, but will allow it when there were other reasons to not allow >>> it. >> >> Just to report, with the patch under discussion re-applied >> (3a40414f826a8f1096d9b94c4a53ef91b25ba28d), plus the patch at your link >> above, my throughput is back to normal again. > > Ok, thanks. > >> So I guess the above patch resolves the issue (on the face of it) for >> me, but whether it is a suitable solution I've no idea. > > Right, we're still looking at that. It seems that it's not an ideal > solution, the regulatory change I proposed is probably better. Could you > check if it helps as well? That is, remove this patch, and apply this > one: http://p.sipsolutions.net/8877cbe3440d94b1.txt OK, so I've removed 0129f39c7d882289.txt, applied 8877cbe3440d94b1.txt, and I've kept 3a40414f826a8f1096d9b94c4a53ef91b25ba28d applied. Rebooted, and happy to report throughput is still good, so 8877cbe3440d94b1.txt also "fixes" it for me. Eddie