Re: [PATCH] Per chain RSSI reporting

From: Michael Ney <neym@vorklift.com>
To: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"ath10k@lists.infradead.org" <ath10k@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>,
	Norik Dzhandzhapanyan <norikd@ethertronics.com>,
	Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Per chain RSSI reporting
Date: Sat, 27 May 2017 13:56:54 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A8583B3-FFB2-4BDE-8041-9478CAD9EF73@vorklift.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmonp72WpT_aUVo_To+k676Ra8S165efPOyXRvvk=_W0YEQ@mail.gmail.com>

The submitted code also doesn't appear to handle RSSI per-peer which would be needed for any use when configured as an access point.

> On May 27, 2017, at 12:39 PM, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> wrote:
> 
> On 27 May 2017 at 09:07, Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> wrote:
>> At low encoding rates, especially if it switches to a single-chain encoding,
>> maybe the on-air signal really is stronger?
>> 
>> Have you verified in some other manner than the signals reported by ath10k
>> are
>> wrong?
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> So yeah, multipath, higher TX rates == weaker TX signal, TPC, etc are
> all interesting to know about at the receiver. it's hard to separate
> that out from the noise sometimes, but in some controlled deployments
> its really obvious.
> 
> 
> 
> -adrian
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ath10k mailing list
> ath10k@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k