Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:40852 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751499AbcBGHJG (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 Feb 2016 02:09:06 -0500 From: Kalle Valo To: Nikolay Martynov Cc: linux-wireless Subject: Re: Monitor interface TX performance boost References: Date: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 09:09:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Nikolay Martynov's message of "Sat, 6 Feb 2016 23:21:45 -0500") Message-ID: <87k2mhro8j.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> (sfid-20160207_080910_872596_981AF150) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Nikolay Martynov writes: > I'm seeing strange behavior on my intel 6300 card. > > If I measure TX performance just after boot (iperf in tcp mode), I get this: > > [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 11.2 MBytes 9.32 Mbits/sec > > But if create and enable monitor interface (with command like 'sudo > iw phy phy0 interface add moni0 type monitor && sudo ifconfig moni0 > up') I get this: > > [ 3] 0.0-10.1 sec 34.8 MBytes 29.0 Mbits/sec > > That's about three times boost in throughput by just creating an > interface (without even using it). > Doing 'ifconfig moni0 down' bring performance back to 10Mbits range. > > Experiments are done with laptop being ~5m from router and not moving. > These results are repeatable, i.e. not caused by random things like > other stations transmitting, or channel being busy. > > Is this something expected? Is there any reason performance can be as > good without monitor interface existing? Maybe the monitor mode disables power save automatically? -- Kalle Valo