[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

Hi all,

I'm also testing the patch Alex and Benoit have released for the community.
After configuring my IBSS network, the station dump command shows this [1].
As you can see, although the IBSS network has been created in HT mode, one
link doesn't seem to support MCS rates.
I would like to know if it is possible to force the MCS scheme. I don't know
why the "NL80211_TXRATE_MCS" parameter is not defined in the bitrates.c
(iw), or what I have to do to enable it.

I also wonder what rate control mechanism is been used in HT mode (minstrel
HT?), and whether such mechanism switches to non HT rates when the channel
quality is bad.

I have been using wireshark to capture data transmissions between 2 PCs
configured in IBSS HT mode. What I see in the radiotap header is that no HT
information is available (protocol, data rate). Do you know how the HT
information can be added to the ratiotap header?

Thanks for your help
Baldo


[1]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
sudo iw dev wlan0 station dump
Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
    inactive time:    8392 ms
    rx bytes:    2476336
    rx packets:    2149
    tx bytes:    433552
    tx packets:    1228
    tx retries:    564
    tx failed:    0
    signal:      -27 dBm
    signal avg:    -28 dBm
    tx bitrate:    270.0 MBit/s MCS 14 40Mhz short GI
Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
    inactive time:    200 ms
    rx bytes:    27577
    rx packets:    434
    tx bytes:    803
    tx packets:    8
    tx retries:    2
    tx failed:    0
    signal:      -26 dBm
    signal avg:    -26 dBm
    tx bitrate:    6.5 MBit/s MCS 0
Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
    inactive time:    96 ms
    rx bytes:    692528
    rx packets:    18938
    tx bytes:    2979324
    tx packets:    2001
    tx retries:    3340
    tx failed:    0
    signal:      -33 dBm
    signal avg:    -33 dBm
    tx bitrate:    54.0 MBit/s
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110210/4a4e287b/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm also testing the patch Alex and Benoit have released for the community.
> After configuring my IBSS network, the station dump command shows this [1].
> As you can see, although the IBSS network has been created in HT mode, one
> link doesn't seem to support MCS rates.
> I would like to know if it is possible to force the MCS scheme. I don't know
> why the "NL80211_TXRATE_MCS" parameter is not defined in the bitrates.c
> (iw), or what I have to do to enable it.

I don't think we can force a particular MCS rate in the station side,
we have rate control algorithms to determine the rate.

>
> I also wonder what rate control mechanism is been used in HT mode (minstrel
> HT?), and whether such mechanism switches to non HT rates when the channel
> quality is bad.
>
> I have been using wireshark to capture data transmissions between 2 PCs
> configured in IBSS HT mode. What I see in the radiotap header is that no HT
> information is available (protocol, data rate). Do you know how the HT
> information can be added to the ratiotap header?

If you are using wireshark, you need to take the latest bleeding edge
that has MCS rate support and also you need latest wireless-testing
that contains MCS rate update to radiotap.

>
> Thanks for your help
> Baldo
>
>
> [1]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> sudo iw dev wlan0 station dump
> Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> ??? inactive time:??? 8392 ms
> ??? rx bytes:??? 2476336
> ??? rx packets:??? 2149
> ??? tx bytes:??? 433552
> ??? tx packets:??? 1228
> ??? tx retries:??? 564
> ??? tx failed:??? 0
> ??? signal:? ??? -27 dBm
> ??? signal avg:??? -28 dBm
> ??? tx bitrate:??? 270.0 MBit/s MCS 14 40Mhz short GI
> Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> ??? inactive time:??? 200 ms
> ??? rx bytes:??? 27577
> ??? rx packets:??? 434
> ??? tx bytes:??? 803
> ??? tx packets:??? 8
> ??? tx retries:??? 2
> ??? tx failed:??? 0
> ??? signal:? ??? -26 dBm
> ??? signal avg:??? -26 dBm
> ??? tx bitrate:??? 6.5 MBit/s MCS 0
> Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> ??? inactive time:??? 96 ms
> ??? rx bytes:??? 692528
> ??? rx packets:??? 18938
> ??? tx bytes:??? 2979324
> ??? tx packets:??? 2001
> ??? tx retries:??? 3340
> ??? tx failed:??? 0
> ??? signal:? ??? -33 dBm
> ??? signal avg:??? -33 dBm
> ??? tx bitrate:??? 54.0 MBit/s
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

2011/2/10 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.wireless@gmail.com>

> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I'm also testing the patch Alex and Benoit have released for the
> community.
> > After configuring my IBSS network, the station dump command shows this
> [1].
> > As you can see, although the IBSS network has been created in HT mode,
> one
> > link doesn't seem to support MCS rates.
> > I would like to know if it is possible to force the MCS scheme. I don't
> know
> > why the "NL80211_TXRATE_MCS" parameter is not defined in the bitrates.c
> > (iw), or what I have to do to enable it.
>
> I don't think we can force a particular MCS rate in the station side,
> we have rate control algorithms to determine the rate.
>
> Do you know where i can find the rate control mechanism that is been used
when i create the HT IBSS network?
I would like to know if such mechanism is able to switch to non-HT rates if
the channel quality is poor.

>
> > I also wonder what rate control mechanism is been used in HT mode
> (minstrel
> > HT?), and whether such mechanism switches to non HT rates when the
> channel
> > quality is bad.
> >
> > I have been using wireshark to capture data transmissions between 2 PCs
> > configured in IBSS HT mode. What I see in the radiotap header is that no
> HT
> > information is available (protocol, data rate). Do you know how the HT
> > information can be added to the ratiotap header?
>
> If you are using wireshark, you need to take the latest bleeding edge
> that has MCS rate support and also you need latest wireless-testing
> that contains MCS rate update to radiotap.
>

I don't completely understand what do you mean. Can you tell me which
version of wireshark i should use? and where i could find the latest
radiotap version?


> >
> > Thanks for your help
> > Baldo
> >
> >
> > [1]
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > sudo iw dev wlan0 station dump
> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> >     inactive time:    8392 ms
> >     rx bytes:    2476336
> >     rx packets:    2149
> >     tx bytes:    433552
> >     tx packets:    1228
> >     tx retries:    564
> >     tx failed:    0
> >     signal:      -27 dBm
> >     signal avg:    -28 dBm
> >     tx bitrate:    270.0 MBit/s MCS 14 40Mhz short GI
> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> >     inactive time:    200 ms
> >     rx bytes:    27577
> >     rx packets:    434
> >     tx bytes:    803
> >     tx packets:    8
> >     tx retries:    2
> >     tx failed:    0
> >     signal:      -26 dBm
> >     signal avg:    -26 dBm
> >     tx bitrate:    6.5 MBit/s MCS 0
> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
> >     inactive time:    96 ms
> >     rx bytes:    692528
> >     rx packets:    18938
> >     tx bytes:    2979324
> >     tx packets:    2001
> >     tx retries:    3340
> >     tx failed:    0
> >     signal:      -33 dBm
> >     signal avg:    -33 dBm
> >     tx bitrate:    54.0 MBit/s
> >
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ath9k-devel mailing list
> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110210/436edac5/attachment-0001.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 10:15 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2011/2/10 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.wireless@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I'm also testing the patch Alex and Benoit have released for the
>> > community.
>> > After configuring my IBSS network, the station dump command shows this
>> > [1].
>> > As you can see, although the IBSS network has been created in HT mode,
>> > one
>> > link doesn't seem to support MCS rates.
>> > I would like to know if it is possible to force the MCS scheme. I don't
>> > know
>> > why the "NL80211_TXRATE_MCS" parameter is not defined in the bitrates.c
>> > (iw), or what I have to do to enable it.
>>
>> I don't think we can force a particular MCS rate in the station side,
>> we have rate control algorithms to determine the rate.
>>
> Do you know where i can find the rate control mechanism that is been used
> when i create the HT IBSS network?
> I would like to know if such mechanism is able to switch to non-HT rates if
> the channel quality is poor.

ministrel -HT ?
I think it will(just like ath9k rate control).

>
>> >
>> > I also wonder what rate control mechanism is been used in HT mode
>> > (minstrel
>> > HT?), and whether such mechanism switches to non HT rates when the
>> > channel
>> > quality is bad.

Yes it should.

>> >
>> > I have been using wireshark to capture data transmissions between 2 PCs
>> > configured in IBSS HT mode. What I see in the radiotap header is that no
>> > HT
>> > information is available (protocol, data rate). Do you know how the HT
>> > information can be added to the ratiotap header?
>>
>> If you are using wireshark, you need to take the latest bleeding edge
>> that has MCS rate support and also you need latest wireless-testing
>> that contains MCS rate update to radiotap.
>
> I don't completely understand what do you mean. Can you tell me which
> version of wireshark i should use? and where i could find the latest
> radiotap version?

latest development branch (not even 1.5.0 version).
http://www.wireshark.org/develop.html

>
>>
>> >
>> > Thanks for your help
>> > Baldo
>> >
>> >
>> > [1]
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > sudo iw dev wlan0 station dump
>> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
>> > ??? inactive time:??? 8392 ms
>> > ??? rx bytes:??? 2476336
>> > ??? rx packets:??? 2149
>> > ??? tx bytes:??? 433552
>> > ??? tx packets:??? 1228
>> > ??? tx retries:??? 564
>> > ??? tx failed:??? 0
>> > ??? signal:? ??? -27 dBm
>> > ??? signal avg:??? -28 dBm
>> > ??? tx bitrate:??? 270.0 MBit/s MCS 14 40Mhz short GI
>> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
>> > ??? inactive time:??? 200 ms
>> > ??? rx bytes:??? 27577
>> > ??? rx packets:??? 434
>> > ??? tx bytes:??? 803
>> > ??? tx packets:??? 8
>> > ??? tx retries:??? 2
>> > ??? tx failed:??? 0
>> > ??? signal:? ??? -26 dBm
>> > ??? signal avg:??? -26 dBm
>> > ??? tx bitrate:??? 6.5 MBit/s MCS 0
>> > Station xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (on wlan0)
>> > ??? inactive time:??? 96 ms
>> > ??? rx bytes:??? 692528
>> > ??? rx packets:??? 18938
>> > ??? tx bytes:??? 2979324
>> > ??? tx packets:??? 2001
>> > ??? tx retries:??? 3340
>> > ??? tx failed:??? 0
>> > ??? signal:? ??? -33 dBm
>> > ??? signal avg:??? -33 dBm
>> > ??? tx bitrate:??? 54.0 MBit/s
>> >
>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ath9k-devel mailing list
>> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>> >
>> >
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

>
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 15:49:02 -0600
> From: Xianghua Xiao <xiaoxianghua@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
> To: simon_alex at web.de
> Cc: ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> Message-ID:
>        <AANLkTi=DTzrGDa60wPBsAgqXDZ--wiJC9qKK3KTf8Dk6@mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Will there be a new version of IBSS/HT patch in the near future?
> Thanks,
>

Can anyone  tell me which 802.11n features are used when the HT IBSS network
is configured with 20 MHz band with?
As far as I know, the frame aggregation (AMSDU, AMPDU) is not working yet
(either in HT40, or in HT20 mode). Obviously, HT20 does not use 40MHz
channel. When I configure my HT20 IBSS network using the Alex and Benoit's
path, I don't experience 802.11n performance, the throughput is even lower
than that achieved with legacy IBSS network. Should the MCS0-15 data rates
also be working in addition to the MIMO technology?

thanks,
Baldo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110322/de7e8d9f/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

>
> Will there be a new version of IBSS/HT patch in the near future?
> Thanks,
>
> Can you tell us something in advance about the new features thal will
appear in the IBSS/HT patch that you are announcing?

Thanks, baldo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110310/46f26cd9/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 12:19 AM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone of you been able to capture the frames generated withing the HT
> IBSS network?
>
> I'm using Wireshark wireshark 1.2.7 and kismet 2011-01, and there is no way
> of captruring the data frames, although the beacons are well captured.

make use of this command  for the sniffer, based on your ad-hoc
networks channel and mode
iw dev <devname> set channel <channel> [HT20|HT40+|HT40-]



>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Xianghua Xiao]

Will there be a new version of IBSS/HT patch in the near future?
Thanks,

On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 12:49 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> Has anyone of you been able to capture the frames generated withing the HT
> IBSS network?
>
> I'm using Wireshark wireshark 1.2.7 and kismet 2011-01, and there is no way
> of captruring the data frames, although the beacons are well captured.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

Has anyone of you been able to capture the frames generated withing the HT
IBSS network?

I'm using Wireshark wireshark 1.2.7 and kismet 2011-01, and there is no way
of captruring the data frames, although the beacons are well captured.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110218/b45858e8/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Adrian Chadd]

I suggest watching minstral "walk its walk" as it tries different rates and
see what the pass/fail/retry/times are for each of the rates.

Take a look for rc_stat in the /sys filesystem, somewhere under ieee80211 or
something similar; I don't have a Linux box handy to check.


Adrian

On 17 February 2011 04:27, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thank you for your illustrative answer adrian.
> I've sent an email today to the mailing list showing my performance in HT
> IBSS mode.
>
> What happens now is that my ad-hoc link don't support HT in both
> directions. One of the stations seems to stay in legacy IBSS mode, although
> sometimes it upgrades to HT mode.
>
> I suppose it is due to the link adaptation mechanism (Minstrel HT?), but I
> would also investigate if the station that stay in legacy IBSS mode is the
> one who creates the HT network, the one who joins the HT network, or if it
> don't really depend on that.
>
> 2011/2/16 Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
>
> Hi,
>>
>> From my understanding:
>>
>> * If your RX chainmask has >1 radio enabled, you'll always be doing
>> receive-side "diversity" (which is really "combining" (MRC) if I
>> understand the technology correctly on multi-radio atheros 11n cards);
>> * If your TX chainmask has >1 radio enabled and the TX descriptor has
>> the relevant chainmask bits set, you should be transmitting on both
>> antennas regardless of the rate. I honestly haven't verified it (I've
>> only verified that behaviour for transmitting legacy rates out of the
>> 11n chips);
>>
>> * For rates < MCS8 (and legacy rates) there's further TX-side trickery
>> that can be going on which I'm not too up-to-date on. For example,
>> some (all?) of the 11n chips allow you to optionally transmit MCS0-7
>> using STBC. But iirc, STBC is only enabled for 1-stream TX.
>>
>> In short, if you've got all the radios enabled  for RX and ath9k is
>> enabling both/all radio chains when TX'ing, I think the answer is
>> "yes" for you. :)
>>
>> Adrian
>>
>> On 16 February 2011 22:47, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > I'm not sure, but I've read somewhere that by default the two antennas
>> are
>> > used.
>> > It is true that I'm not interested in selecting the number of antennas,
>> what
>> > I really want is that the MIMO capability is exploited if I'm using
>> 802.11n
>> > HT IBSS operation mode.
>> > Can someone confirm that by default the two antennas (spatial diversity)
>> are
>> > being used when we create the HT IBSS network?
>> >
>> > 2011/2/16 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com
>> >
>> >> wrote:
>> >> > Hello,
>> >> >
>> >> > Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
>> >>
>> >> I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
>> >> chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> > I'm using a similar setting than you:
>> >> > Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
>> >> > Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> >> > suggested by
>> >> > Alex.
>> >> > Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
>> >> >
>> >> > Thanks in advance,
>> >> > Baldomero
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Hi all,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations
>> >> >> are
>> >> >> follow.
>> >> >> Board: pcengine alix3d2
>> >> >> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>> >> >> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> >> >> suggested by Alex.
>> >> >> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>> >> >> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
>> >> >> antennas).
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > _______________________________________________
>> >> > ath9k-devel mailing list
>> >> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> >> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > ath9k-devel mailing list
>> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110217/33fe13ab/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

Thank you for your illustrative answer adrian.
I've sent an email today to the mailing list showing my performance in HT
IBSS mode.

What happens now is that my ad-hoc link don't support HT in both directions.
One of the stations seems to stay in legacy IBSS mode, although sometimes it
upgrades to HT mode.

I suppose it is due to the link adaptation mechanism (Minstrel HT?), but I
would also investigate if the station that stay in legacy IBSS mode is the
one who creates the HT network, the one who joins the HT network, or if it
don't really depend on that.

2011/2/16 Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>

> Hi,
>
> From my understanding:
>
> * If your RX chainmask has >1 radio enabled, you'll always be doing
> receive-side "diversity" (which is really "combining" (MRC) if I
> understand the technology correctly on multi-radio atheros 11n cards);
> * If your TX chainmask has >1 radio enabled and the TX descriptor has
> the relevant chainmask bits set, you should be transmitting on both
> antennas regardless of the rate. I honestly haven't verified it (I've
> only verified that behaviour for transmitting legacy rates out of the
> 11n chips);
>
> * For rates < MCS8 (and legacy rates) there's further TX-side trickery
> that can be going on which I'm not too up-to-date on. For example,
> some (all?) of the 11n chips allow you to optionally transmit MCS0-7
> using STBC. But iirc, STBC is only enabled for 1-stream TX.
>
> In short, if you've got all the radios enabled  for RX and ath9k is
> enabling both/all radio chains when TX'ing, I think the answer is
> "yes" for you. :)
>
> Adrian
>
> On 16 February 2011 22:47, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I'm not sure, but I've read somewhere that by default the two antennas
> are
> > used.
> > It is true that I'm not interested in selecting the number of antennas,
> what
> > I really want is that the MIMO capability is exploited if I'm using
> 802.11n
> > HT IBSS operation mode.
> > Can someone confirm that by default the two antennas (spatial diversity)
> are
> > being used when we create the HT IBSS network?
> >
> > 2011/2/16 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
> >>
> >> I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
> >> chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I'm using a similar setting than you:
> >> > Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
> >> > Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> >> > suggested by
> >> > Alex.
> >> > Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
> >> >
> >> > Thanks in advance,
> >> > Baldomero
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations
> >> >> are
> >> >> follow.
> >> >> Board: pcengine alix3d2
> >> >> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
> >> >> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> >> >> suggested by Alex.
> >> >> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
> >> >> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
> >> >>
> >> >> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
> >> >> antennas).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > ath9k-devel mailing list
> >> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> >> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> >> >
> >> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ath9k-devel mailing list
> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110217/b5985d7e/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

2011/2/16 Brian Prodoehl <bprodoehl@gmail.com>

> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > I'm not sure, but I've read somewhere that by default the two antennas
> are
> > used.
> > It is true that I'm not interested in selecting the number of antennas,
> what
> > I really want is that the MIMO capability is exploited if I'm using
> 802.11n
> > HT IBSS operation mode.
> > Can someone confirm that by default the two antennas (spatial diversity)
> are
> > being used when we create the HT IBSS network?
> >
> > 2011/2/16 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hello,
> >> >
> >> > Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
> >>
> >> I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
> >> chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I'm using a similar setting than you:
> >> > Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
> >> > Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> >> > suggested by
> >> > Alex.
> >> > Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
> >> >
> >> > Thanks in advance,
> >> > Baldomero
> >> >>
> >> >> Hi all,
> >> >>
> >> >> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations
> >> >> are
> >> >> follow.
> >> >> Board: pcengine alix3d2
> >> >> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
> >> >> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> >> >> suggested by Alex.
> >> >> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
> >> >> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
> >> >>
> >> >> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
> >> >> antennas).
>
>
> If you can operate beyond MCS7 (MCS8-15), then you are using two
> spatial streams over two antennas.  I have seen this with HT IBSS and
> ath9k.
>
> -Brian
>

I get the following results, so based on your comments I suppose the two
antennas are being used:

It is a scp transmission between two laptops joined at the same HT IBSS
network.
(The first parameter shows the file transmitted percentage, the second is
the amount of MB transmitted and the third one the estimated time of arrival
(or expected time to finish the transmission).

5%   51MB  10.9MB/s   01:22 ETA signal:  -33 dBm tx bitrate: 300.0 MBit/s
MCS 15 40Mhz short GI
10%  100MB  12.3MB/s   01:09 ETA signal:  -33 dBm tx bitrate:    300.0
MBit/s MCS 15 40Mhz short GI

This results belong to one of the laptops, the other one I don't know why is
not using HT rates (although both of them are similar).
Are you having HT rates bidirectionally? Sometimes it happens to me that one
of the HT laptops shows legacy 2.4 or 5 rates, and there is no way of
upgrading its data rates. I'm going to dig into this right now.

Baldo
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110217/826b2c9e/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Adrian Chadd]

Hi,

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Brian Prodoehl]

On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 9:47 AM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm not sure, but I've read somewhere that by default the two antennas are
> used.
> It is true that I'm not interested in selecting the number of antennas, what
> I really want is that the MIMO capability is exploited if I'm using 802.11n
> HT IBSS operation mode.
> Can someone confirm that by default the two antennas (spatial diversity) are
> being used when we create the HT IBSS network?
>
> 2011/2/16 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
>>
>> I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
>> chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.
>>
>> >
>> > I'm using a similar setting than you:
>> > Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
>> > Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> > suggested by
>> > Alex.
>> > Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
>> >
>> > Thanks in advance,
>> > Baldomero
>> >>
>> >> Hi all,
>> >>
>> >> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations
>> >> are
>> >> follow.
>> >> Board: pcengine alix3d2
>> >> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>> >> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> >> suggested by Alex.
>> >> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>> >> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>> >>
>> >> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
>> >> antennas).


If you can operate beyond MCS7 (MCS8-15), then you are using two
spatial streams over two antennas.  I have seen this with HT IBSS and
ath9k.

-Brian

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

I'm not sure, but I've read somewhere that by default the two antennas are
used.
It is true that I'm not interested in selecting the number of antennas, what
I really want is that the MIMO capability is exploited if I'm using 802.11n
HT IBSS operation mode.
Can someone confirm that by default the two antennas (spatial diversity) are
being used when we create the HT IBSS network?

2011/2/16 Mohammed Shafi <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>

> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
>
> I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
> chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.
>
> >
> > I'm using a similar setting than you:
> > Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
> > Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch suggested
> by
> > Alex.
> > Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Baldomero
> >>
> >> Hi all,
> >>
> >> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are
> >> follow.
> >> Board: pcengine alix3d2
> >> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
> >> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> >> suggested by Alex.
> >> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
> >> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
> >>
> >> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
> >> antennas).
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ath9k-devel mailing list
> > ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> > https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110216/7fe97e6d/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?

I don't know why you should do that. I guess changing the tx/rx
chainmask will do after it was read from eeprom.

>
> I'm using a similar setting than you:
> Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch suggested by
> Alex.
> Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Baldomero
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are
>> follow.
>> Board: pcengine alix3d2
>> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> suggested by Alex.
>> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>>
>> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
>> antennas).
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Peizhao Hu]

Hi,

I meant the number of actual antenna was used. I am not sure whether it 
has the same antenna setting in /sys/kernel/debug/ieee80211 like ath5k.

regards;

Peizhao


On 15/02/11 19:10, Sagar Bijwe wrote:
> I would also like  to know that...
> -Sagar
>
> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com 
> <mailto:baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>     Hello,
>
>     Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
>
>     I'm using a similar setting than you:
>     Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
>     Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>     suggested by Alex.
>     Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
>
>     Thanks in advance,
>     Baldomero
>
>
>         Hi all,
>
>         I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform
>         configurations are
>         follow.
>         Board: pcengine alix3d2
>         Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>         Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>         suggested by Alex.
>         Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>         Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>
>         Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or
>         three
>         antennas).
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     ath9k-devel mailing list
>     ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org <mailto:ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
>     https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110216/15447189/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Sagar Bijwe]

I would also like  to know that...
-Sagar

On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 2:35 PM, Baldomero Coll <baldo.ath9k@gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello,
>
> Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?
>
> I'm using a similar setting than you:
> Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch suggested
> by Alex.
> Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Baldomero
>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are
>> follow.
>> Board: pcengine alix3d2
>> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
>> suggested by Alex.
>> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>>
>> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
>> antennas).
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110215/051b2569/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Baldomero Coll]

Hello,

Can you please tell me how do you select one o two antennas?

I'm using a similar setting than you:
Linux kernel: 2.6.32-28-generic-pae.
Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch suggested by
Alex.
Radio card: Ubiquiti SR71x

Thanks in advance,
Baldomero

>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are
> follow.
> Board: pcengine alix3d2
> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch
> suggested by Alex.
> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>
> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
> antennas).
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ath9k.org/pipermail/ath9k-devel/attachments/20110215/17d99b55/attachment.htm 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:08 AM, Peizhao Hu <peizhao.research@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are
> follow.
> Board: pcengine alix3d2
> Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
> Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch suggested by
> Alex.
> Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
> Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load
>
> Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three
> antennas).
>
> Any one have idea how I can achieve 100Mbps+ throughput with my current
> setup?
>
>
> By the way, I tried to the "[PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless: Fix ath9k debug log
> issue" patch. However, I am still getting these error logs.
>
> [ ?228.982367] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5180 MHz (Ch 36) on
> phy0
> [ ?229.699391] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5745 MHz (Ch 149) on
> phy0
> [ ?229.853470] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5805 MHz (Ch 161) on
> phy0
> [ ?231.971055] wlan0: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join
> [ ?232.108921] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.112313] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.127773] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.200898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.204872] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.220331] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.292898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.296855] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.312308] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.384899] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.388865] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.404319] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.532887] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.536848] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.552297] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.624899] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.628859] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.644320] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.716898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.720870] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.736331] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.808909] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.812880] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.828342] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.900900] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.904865] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?232.920320] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?232.992898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?232.996849] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?233.012308] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?233.084898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?233.088861] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?233.104319] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?233.176898] ath: ce24be20
> [ ?233.180870] ath: ce24be48
> [ ?233.196332] ath: ce24be04
> [ ?234.932420] wlan0: Selected IBSS BSSID ae:d9:24:0e:d9:52 based on
> configured SSID
> [ ?236.433296] wlan0: no IPv6 routers present

have no idea why those errors are coming for you, but the patch does
fixed the issue.
thanks,
shafi
>
>
>
>
>
> regards;
>
> Peizhao
>
>
> On 04/02/11 15:27, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Peizhao Hu<peizhao.research@gmail.com>
>> ?wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Alex,
>>>
>>> I am testing the patch. I got the following dmesg message.
>>>
>>> I am using compat-wireless-2011-01-17.tar.bz2 and iw-0.9.21.tar.bz2 with
>>> both patches. The linux kernel is 2.6.35 from linux-wireless.
>>>
>>> [ 7549.786227] wlan0: No active IBSS STAs - trying to scan for other
>>> IBSS networks with same SSID (merge)
>>> [ 7549.925224] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7549.928625] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7549.944108] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.073159] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.077125] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.092581] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.277151] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.281123] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.296581] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.369159] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.373132] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.388592] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.461160] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.465117] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.480581] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.553160] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.557127] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.572581] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.701149] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.705107] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.720570] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.793161] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.797116] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.812569] ath: cf559e04
>>> [ 7550.885171] ath: cf559e20
>>> [ 7550.889124] ath: cf559e48
>>> [ 7550.904582] ath: cf559e04
>>
>> Can you please try with this patch named [PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless:
>> Fix ath9k debug log issue.
>>>
>>> regards;
>>>
>>> Peizhao
>>>
>>>
>>> On 19/01/11 23:42, Alexander Simon wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi there,
>>>>
>>>> i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
>>>> wireless.
>>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
>>>> I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!
>>>>
>>>> Regards, Alex
>>>>
>>>> Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Robert
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[le thanh son]

Dear All

I have added the patch of HT support in adhoc mode by Alex to compat-wireless-2011-01-24 and other patch on iw tool.
My radio card is AR9220 on AR71xx processor board.
The set up is as following:

iw phy phy0 interface add wlan01 type ibss
ifconfig wlan01 up
iw wlan01 ibss join test2 5745 HT40+

There are some issues as follows:
1. It could not get higher MCS. Normally just MCS0
Station 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:ee (on wlan01)                                           
        inactive time:  300 ms                                                  
        rx bytes:       63190                                                   
        rx packets:     1173                                                    
        tx bytes:       11724                                                   
        tx packets:     100                                                     
        tx retries:     0                                                       
        tx failed:      0                                                       
        signal:         -51 dBm                                                 
        signal avg:     -52 dBm                                                 
        tx bitrate:     6.5 MBit/s MCS 0  
2. I tested throughput by iperf, tcp, it shows very low throughput, just about 1.3 Mbps. It means the lowest bit rate is in operation, not higher bit rate (such as MCS 15)

Please not that if I change to AP-STA mode, then immediately the higher MCS schemes activated (normally MCS15), so the signal is quite good.

3. Although I just set up 1 point to point link and expected only ONE adhoc station shown in the output of iw dev wlan0 station dump. But in fact it shows more than one stations ?!

 root at OpenWrt:/# iw dev wlan01 station dump                                      
Station 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:22 (on wlan01)                                           
        inactive time:  42740 ms                                                
        rx bytes:       229                                                     
        rx packets:     2                                                       
        tx bytes:       0                                                       
        tx packets:     0                                                       
        tx retries:     0                                                       
        tx failed:      0                                                       
        signal:         -51 dBm                                                 
        signal avg:     -50 dBm                                                 
        tx bitrate:     6.0 MBit/s                                              
Station 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:10 (on wlan01)                                           
        inactive time:  24060 ms                                                
        rx bytes:       470                                                     
        rx packets:     4                                                       
        tx bytes:       0                                                       
        tx packets:     0                                                       
        tx retries:     0                                                       
        tx failed:      0                                                       
        signal:         -50 dBm                                                 
        signal avg:     -51 dBm                                                 
        tx bitrate:     6.0 MBit/s                                              
Station 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:f5 (on wlan01)                                           
        inactive time:  0 ms                                                    
        rx bytes:       7254                                                    
        rx packets:     1499                                                    
        tx bytes:       3412532                                                 
        tx packets:     2411                                                    
        tx retries:     0                                                       
        tx failed:      0                                                       
        signal:         -52 dBm                                                 
        signal avg:     -52 dBm                                                 
        tx bitrate:     6.0 MBit/s                                              
Station 00:xx:xx:xx:xx:ee (on wlan01)                                           
        inactive time:  300 ms                                                  
        rx bytes:       63190                                                   
        rx packets:     1173                                                    
        tx bytes:       11724                                                   
        tx packets:     100                                                     
        tx retries:     0                                                       
        tx failed:      0                                                       
        signal:         -51 dBm                                                 
        signal avg:     -52 dBm                                                 
        tx bitrate:     6.5 MBit/s MCS 0                                        
root at OpenWrt:/# iw dev wlan01 link                                              
Joined IBSS 02:xx:xx:xx:xx:45 (on wlan01)                                       
        SSID: test2                                                             
        freq: 5745                  

The question is whether I set up correctly ? How should I set up ?

Thanks in advance

Le


>Hi all,

>I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are 
>follow.
>Board: pcengine alix3d2
>Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
>Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch 
>suggested by Alex.
>Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
>Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load

>Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three 
>antennas).

>Any one have idea how I can achieve 100Mbps+ throughput with my current 
>setup?


>By the way, I tried to the "[PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless: Fix ath9k debug 
>log issue" patch. However, I am still getting these error logs.

>[  228.982367] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5180 MHz (Ch 36) 
>on phy0
>[  229.699391] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5745 MHz (Ch 
>149) on phy0
>[  229.853470] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5805 MHz (Ch 
>161) on phy0
>[  231.971055] wlan0: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join
>[  232.108921] ath: ce24be20
>[  232.112313] ath: ce24be48
>[  232.127773] ath: ce24be04
>[  232.200898] ath: ce24be20
>[  232.204872] ath: ce24be48
>[  232.220331] ath: ce24be04
>[  232.292898] ath: ce24be20
>[  232.296855] ath: ce24be48
>[  232.312308] ath: ce24be04
>[  232.384899] ath: ce24be20
[  234.932420] wlan0: Selected IBSS BSSID ae:d9:24:0e:d9:52 based on 
configured SSID
[  236.433296] wlan0: no IPv6 routers present





regards;

Peizhao


On 04/02/11 15:27, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Peizhao Hu<peizhao.research@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> I am testing the patch. I got the following dmesg message.
>>
>> I am using compat-wireless-2011-01-17.tar.bz2 and iw-0.9.21.tar.bz2 with
>> both patches. The linux kernel is 2.6.35 from linux-wireless.
>>
>> [ 7549.786227] wlan0: No active IBSS STAs - trying to scan for other
>> IBSS networks with same SSID (merge)
>> [ 7549.925224] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7549.928625] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7549.944108] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.073159] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.077125] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.092581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.277151] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.281123] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.296581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.369159] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.373132] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.388592] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.461160] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.465117] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.480581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.553160] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.557127] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.572581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.701149] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.705107] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.720570] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.793161] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.797116] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.812569] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.885171] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.889124] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.904582] ath: cf559e04
> Can you please try with this patch named [PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless:
> Fix ath9k debug log issue.
>> regards;
>>
>> Peizhao
>>
>>
>> On 19/01/11 23:42, Alexander Simon wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
>>> wireless.
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
>>> I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!
>>>
>>> Regards, Alex
>>>
>>> Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Robert



      

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Peizhao Hu]

Hi all,

I would like to confirm my findings. My test platform configurations are 
follow.
Board: pcengine alix3d2
Linux kernel: 2.6.35 from linux-wireless git
Driver: compat-wireless-2011-01-17 and iw-0.9.21 with the patch 
suggested by Alex.
Radio card: Ubiqiti SR71a on channel 36 with HT40+
Measurement tool and settings: Iperf, UDP, 100Mb offered load

Recored throughput: 50-54Mbps (one antenna); 78-80Mbps (two or three 
antennas).

Any one have idea how I can achieve 100Mbps+ throughput with my current 
setup?


By the way, I tried to the "[PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless: Fix ath9k debug 
log issue" patch. However, I am still getting these error logs.

[  228.982367] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5180 MHz (Ch 36) 
on phy0
[  229.699391] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5745 MHz (Ch 
149) on phy0
[  229.853470] cfg80211: Found new beacon on frequency: 5805 MHz (Ch 
161) on phy0
[  231.971055] wlan0: Trigger new scan to find an IBSS to join
[  232.108921] ath: ce24be20
[  232.112313] ath: ce24be48
[  232.127773] ath: ce24be04
[  232.200898] ath: ce24be20
[  232.204872] ath: ce24be48
[  232.220331] ath: ce24be04
[  232.292898] ath: ce24be20
[  232.296855] ath: ce24be48
[  232.312308] ath: ce24be04
[  232.384899] ath: ce24be20
[  232.388865] ath: ce24be48
[  232.404319] ath: ce24be04
[  232.532887] ath: ce24be20
[  232.536848] ath: ce24be48
[  232.552297] ath: ce24be04
[  232.624899] ath: ce24be20
[  232.628859] ath: ce24be48
[  232.644320] ath: ce24be04
[  232.716898] ath: ce24be20
[  232.720870] ath: ce24be48
[  232.736331] ath: ce24be04
[  232.808909] ath: ce24be20
[  232.812880] ath: ce24be48
[  232.828342] ath: ce24be04
[  232.900900] ath: ce24be20
[  232.904865] ath: ce24be48
[  232.920320] ath: ce24be04
[  232.992898] ath: ce24be20
[  232.996849] ath: ce24be48
[  233.012308] ath: ce24be04
[  233.084898] ath: ce24be20
[  233.088861] ath: ce24be48
[  233.104319] ath: ce24be04
[  233.176898] ath: ce24be20
[  233.180870] ath: ce24be48
[  233.196332] ath: ce24be04
[  234.932420] wlan0: Selected IBSS BSSID ae:d9:24:0e:d9:52 based on 
configured SSID
[  236.433296] wlan0: no IPv6 routers present





regards;

Peizhao


On 04/02/11 15:27, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Peizhao Hu<peizhao.research@gmail.com>  wrote:
>> Hi Alex,
>>
>> I am testing the patch. I got the following dmesg message.
>>
>> I am using compat-wireless-2011-01-17.tar.bz2 and iw-0.9.21.tar.bz2 with
>> both patches. The linux kernel is 2.6.35 from linux-wireless.
>>
>> [ 7549.786227] wlan0: No active IBSS STAs - trying to scan for other
>> IBSS networks with same SSID (merge)
>> [ 7549.925224] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7549.928625] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7549.944108] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.073159] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.077125] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.092581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.277151] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.281123] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.296581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.369159] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.373132] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.388592] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.461160] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.465117] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.480581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.553160] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.557127] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.572581] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.701149] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.705107] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.720570] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.793161] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.797116] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.812569] ath: cf559e04
>> [ 7550.885171] ath: cf559e20
>> [ 7550.889124] ath: cf559e48
>> [ 7550.904582] ath: cf559e04
> Can you please try with this patch named [PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless:
> Fix ath9k debug log issue.
>> regards;
>>
>> Peizhao
>>
>>
>> On 19/01/11 23:42, Alexander Simon wrote:
>>> Hi there,
>>>
>>> i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
>>> wireless.
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
>>> I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!
>>>
>>> Regards, Alex
>>>
>>> Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Robert
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>> _______________________________________________
>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:34 AM, Peizhao Hu <peizhao.research@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> I am testing the patch. I got the following dmesg message.
>
> I am using compat-wireless-2011-01-17.tar.bz2 and iw-0.9.21.tar.bz2 with
> both patches. The linux kernel is 2.6.35 from linux-wireless.
>
> [ 7549.786227] wlan0: No active IBSS STAs - trying to scan for other
> IBSS networks with same SSID (merge)
> [ 7549.925224] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7549.928625] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7549.944108] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.073159] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.077125] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.092581] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.277151] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.281123] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.296581] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.369159] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.373132] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.388592] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.461160] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.465117] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.480581] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.553160] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.557127] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.572581] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.701149] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.705107] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.720570] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.793161] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.797116] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.812569] ath: cf559e04
> [ 7550.885171] ath: cf559e20
> [ 7550.889124] ath: cf559e48
> [ 7550.904582] ath: cf559e04

Can you please try with this patch named [PATCH 1/1] compat-wireless:
Fix ath9k debug log issue.
>
> regards;
>
> Peizhao
>
>
> On 19/01/11 23:42, Alexander Simon wrote:
>> Hi there,
>>
>> i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
>> wireless.
>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
>> I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!
>>
>> Regards, Alex
>>
>> Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>>
>>> Thanks.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Robert
>> _______________________________________________
>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Peizhao Hu]

Hi Alex,

I am testing the patch. I got the following dmesg message.

I am using compat-wireless-2011-01-17.tar.bz2 and iw-0.9.21.tar.bz2 with 
both patches. The linux kernel is 2.6.35 from linux-wireless.

[ 7549.786227] wlan0: No active IBSS STAs - trying to scan for other 
IBSS networks with same SSID (merge)
[ 7549.925224] ath: cf559e20
[ 7549.928625] ath: cf559e48
[ 7549.944108] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.073159] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.077125] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.092581] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.277151] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.281123] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.296581] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.369159] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.373132] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.388592] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.461160] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.465117] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.480581] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.553160] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.557127] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.572581] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.701149] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.705107] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.720570] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.793161] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.797116] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.812569] ath: cf559e04
[ 7550.885171] ath: cf559e20
[ 7550.889124] ath: cf559e48
[ 7550.904582] ath: cf559e04

regards;

Peizhao


On 19/01/11 23:42, Alexander Simon wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
> wireless.
> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
> I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!
>
> Regards, Alex
>
> Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robert
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[bcoll]

Dear Peizhao,

Recently has been post this patch that I think It could be interesting for you:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191

Regards,
bcoll

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Alexander Simon]

Hi there,

i just want to let you know i just released my patch for this on linux-
wireless.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel.wireless.general/63191
I really apreciate any tests/comments/proposals on this!

Regards, Alex

Am Mittwoch, 22. Dezember 2010, 09:25:39 schrieb Robert Chan:
> Hi All,
> 
> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Robert

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Brian Prodoehl]

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 1:10 AM, Robert Chan <robert.chan.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> After some research done on ath9k's support of HT on Adhoc mode, I found on
> the mac80211 driver page (http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers) that
> ath9k seems to support IBSS *and/or* mesh *and/or* 802.11N:
>
> Driver ? ?Manufacturer ? ?cfg80211 ? ?AP ? ?IBSS ? ?mesh ? ?monitor ? ?PHY
> modes ? ?Buses
> ath9k ? ? Atheros ? ?yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? A/B/G/N ? ? PCI
> / PCI-E / AHB / ? ? PCMCIA
>
> So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes
> above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such
> as IBSS + N + mesh)?
>
> Any clarification will be very much appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Robert Chan" <robert.chan.list@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:25 PM
> To: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>; <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>
>> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:36 PM
>> To: <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
>> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>>
>>> Im working on it.
>>>
>>> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two
>>> cells
>>> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info
>>> structure.
>>> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first
>>> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.
>>>
>>> Greetings, Alex


Mesh in that list is entirely different than IBSS.  It is an
802.11s-compliant MAC-layer mesh.  Of course, you're free to run mesh
routing protocols over an IBSS network, but that's not what they mean
by mesh in that list of supported features.  Adding support for HT
rates under IBSS is ongoing, outside of anything you'll find in
compat-wireless.  So, you're correct in that 802.11n and IBSS do not
work together yet.  I believe the same is true for the 802.11s mesh.

Brian

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Jouni Malinen]

On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 23:21 -0800, Robert Chan wrote:
> As I am implementing a project that requires a 802.11N mesh network at low 
> (or zero actually, for a poor area deployment) budget.  May I ask what is 
> the progress in that end (mesh over 11N)?  Or if I want to jump in, which 
> part of the code should I begin with (of course I really doubt I could do 
> much all by myself, but I will try to probably help out)?

I haven't followed this closely, so I don't have a good answer to that
question. Anyway, this is not really the best mailing list for that
either since the mesh code is almost completely in mac80211 and not in
the drivers like ath9k. linux-wireless mailing list would be better
place for this discussion:
http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/MailingLists


- Jouni

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Robert Chan]

Hi Jouni and Mohammed,

Thanks very much for the quick reply.

As I am implementing a project that requires a 802.11N mesh network at low 
(or zero actually, for a poor area deployment) budget.  May I ask what is 
the progress in that end (mesh over 11N)?  Or if I want to jump in, which 
part of the code should I begin with (of course I really doubt I could do 
much all by myself, but I will try to probably help out)?

Thanks very much again in advance.

Regards,

Robert

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Jouni Malinen" <jouni.malinen@atheros.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2010 2:52 PM
To: "Mohammed Shafi" <shafi.ath9k@gmail.com>
Cc: "Robert Chan" <robert.chan.list@gmail.com>; 
<ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 22:32 -0800, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Robert Chan
>> <robert.chan.list@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the 
>> > modes
>> > above are only independently supported (but not able to work together 
>> > such
>> > as IBSS + N + mesh)?
>
> The modes in that table should be considered independent and support for
> 802.11n in the table should really be read as at least one of the modes
> supporting it, not all modes supporting it. So no, that does not mean
> that either IBSS or mesh would support 802.11n (AP and station modes
> do).
>
>> I think 'mesh mode' also handled in mac80211 , if mesh mode is
>> supported with 11n then ibss(which is a sub-set ?) should have 11n
>> support.
>
> Mesh and IBSS are independent modes and both will need to be
> independently addressed for 802.11n support. In addition, both of them
> have protocol limitations on which 802.11n HT features can be supported.
> Finally, HT support for either mode is not yet complete in mac80211 and
> as such, cannot be complete with ath9k either.
>
> - Jouni
>
>
> 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Jouni Malinen
<jouni.malinen@atheros.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 22:32 -0800, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
>> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Robert Chan
>> <robert.chan.list@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes
>> > above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such
>> > as IBSS + N + mesh)?
>
> The modes in that table should be considered independent and support for
> 802.11n in the table should really be read as at least one of the modes
> supporting it, not all modes supporting it. So no, that does not mean
> that either IBSS or mesh would support 802.11n (AP and station modes
> do).
>
>> I think 'mesh mode' also handled in mac80211 , if mesh mode is
>> supported with 11n then ibss(which is a sub-set ?) should have 11n
>> support.
>
> Mesh and IBSS are independent modes and both will need to be
> independently addressed for 802.11n support. In addition, both of them
> have protocol limitations on which 802.11n HT features can be supported.
> Finally, HT support for either mode is not yet complete in mac80211 and
> as such, cannot be complete with ath9k either.
>

Thanks a lot.

> - Jouni
>
>
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Jouni Malinen]

On Tue, 2010-12-28 at 22:32 -0800, Mohammed Shafi wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Robert Chan
> <robert.chan.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> > So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes
> > above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such
> > as IBSS + N + mesh)?

The modes in that table should be considered independent and support for
802.11n in the table should really be read as at least one of the modes
supporting it, not all modes supporting it. So no, that does not mean
that either IBSS or mesh would support 802.11n (AP and station modes
do).

> I think 'mesh mode' also handled in mac80211 , if mesh mode is
> supported with 11n then ibss(which is a sub-set ?) should have 11n
> support.

Mesh and IBSS are independent modes and both will need to be
independently addressed for 802.11n support. In addition, both of them
have protocol limitations on which 802.11n HT features can be supported.
Finally, HT support for either mode is not yet complete in mac80211 and
as such, cannot be complete with ath9k either.

- Jouni

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Wed, Dec 29, 2010 at 11:40 AM, Robert Chan
<robert.chan.list@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> After some research done on ath9k's support of HT on Adhoc mode, I found on
> the mac80211 driver page (http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers) that
> ath9k seems to support IBSS *and/or* mesh *and/or* 802.11N:
>
> Driver ? ?Manufacturer ? ?cfg80211 ? ?AP ? ?IBSS ? ?mesh ? ?monitor ? ?PHY
> modes ? ?Buses
> ath9k ? ? Atheros ? ?yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? yes ? ? A/B/G/N ? ? PCI
> / PCI-E / AHB / ? ? PCMCIA
>
> So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes
> above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such
> as IBSS + N + mesh)?

I think 'mesh mode' also handled in mac80211 , if mesh mode is
supported with 11n then ibss(which is a sub-set ?) should have 11n
support.
If I am wrong some one please correct me.

>
> Any clarification will be very much appreciated.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Robert Chan" <robert.chan.list@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:25 PM
> To: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>; <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Robert
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> From: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>
>> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:36 PM
>> To: <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
>> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>>
>>> Im working on it.
>>>
>>> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two
>>> cells
>>> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info
>>> structure.
>>> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first
>>> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.
>>>
>>> Greetings, Alex
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Robert Chan]

Dear all,

After some research done on ath9k's support of HT on Adhoc mode, I found on 
the mac80211 driver page (http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers) that 
ath9k seems to support IBSS *and/or* mesh *and/or* 802.11N:

Driver    Manufacturer    cfg80211    AP    IBSS    mesh    monitor    PHY 
modes    Buses
ath9k     Atheros    yes     yes     yes     yes     yes     A/B/G/N     PCI 
/ PCI-E / AHB /     PCMCIA

So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes 
above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such 
as IBSS + N + mesh)?

Any clarification will be very much appreciated.

Regards,

Robert

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert Chan" <robert.chan.list@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:25 PM
To: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>; <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

> Hi All,
>
> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:36 PM
> To: <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>
>> Im working on it.
>>
>> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two 
>> cells
>> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info 
>> structure.
>> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first
>> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.
>>
>> Greetings, Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>
> 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Robert Chan]

Dear all,

After some research done on ath9k's support of HT on Adhoc mode, I found on 
the mac80211 driver page (http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers) that 
ath9k seems to support IBSS *and/or* mesh *and/or* 802.11N:

Driver    Manufacturer    cfg80211    AP    IBSS    mesh    monitor    PHY 
modes    Buses
ath9k     Atheros    yes     yes     yes     yes     yes     A/B/G/N     PCI 
/ PCI-E / AHB /     PCMCIA

So should I assume that the details here are "too updated" or are the modes 
above are only independently supported (but not able to work together such 
as IBSS + N + mesh)?

Any clarification will be very much appreciated.

Regards,

Robert

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Robert Chan" <robert.chan.list@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 2010 4:25 PM
To: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>; <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

> Hi All,
>
> May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?
>
> Thanks.
>
> Regards,
>
> Robert
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:36 PM
> To: <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
> Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode
>
>> Im working on it.
>>
>> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two 
>> cells
>> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info 
>> structure.
>> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first
>> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.
>>
>> Greetings, Alex
>> _______________________________________________
>> ath9k-devel mailing list
>> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
>> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>>
> 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Robert Chan]

Hi All,

May I ask whether the HT support (for Adhoc) is already in the trunk?

Thanks.

Regards,

Robert


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Alexander Simon" <simon_alex@web.de>
Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2010 8:36 PM
To: <ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org>
Subject: Re: [ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

> Im working on it.
>
> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two 
> cells
> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info 
> structure.
> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first
> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.
>
> Greetings, Alex
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
> 

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 04:36:19AM -0800, Alexander Simon wrote:
> Im working on it.
> 
> I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two cells 
> deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info structure. 
> Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first 
> patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.

This is great news, please feel free to edit:

http://wireless.kernel.org/en/users/Drivers/ath9k/todo
http://wireless.kernel.org/en/developers/todo-list

  Luis

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Alexander Simon]

Im working on it.

I took the initial patches vom Benoit Papillault. Right now, i have two cells 
deploy and read HT beacons and have them entered into the sta_info structure. 
Minstrel_ht also seems to drive at HT rates. I hope I can provide a first 
patch tomorrow, as at the moment I also have problems with txpower.

Greetings, Alex

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Mohammed Shafi]

On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Peizhao Hu <peizhao.research@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi
>
> Could anyone please tell me the progress on Ath9k HT support for adhoc
> mode?
adhoc mode is handled in mac80211 and that is yet to support HT.
>
> On the latest OpenWRT trunk build, I can only get 22Mbps throughput with
> 54Mbit/s rate.
>
> below are my setting for the AR9220 radio.
>
> config 'wifi-device' 'radio0'
> ? ? option 'type' 'mac80211'
> ? ? option 'macaddr' '00:0c:42:64:bf:70'
> ? ? option 'hwmode' '11na'
> ? ? option 'htmode' 'HT40-'
> ? ? list 'ht_capab' 'SHORT-GI-40'
> ? ? list 'ht_capab' 'TX-STBC'
> ? ? list 'ht_capab' 'RX-STBC1'
> ? ? list 'ht_capab' 'DSSS_CCK-40'
> ? ? option 'country' 'US'
> ? ? option 'channel' '44'
> ? ? option 'txpower' '1'
>
> config 'wifi-iface'
> ? ? option 'device' 'radio0'
> ? ? option 'ssid' 'ath9kTest2'
> ? ? option 'encryption' 'none'
> ? ? option 'network' 'wan'
> ? ? option 'mode' 'adhoc'
>
> --
> regards;
>
> Peizhao
>
> _______________________________________________
> ath9k-devel mailing list
> ath9k-devel at lists.ath9k.org
> https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
>

[ath9k-devel] Progress on Ath9k HT support on Adhoc mode

[Peizhao Hu]

Hi

Could anyone please tell me the progress on Ath9k HT support for adhoc 
mode?

On the latest OpenWRT trunk build, I can only get 22Mbps throughput with 
54Mbit/s rate.

below are my setting for the AR9220 radio.

config 'wifi-device' 'radio0'
     option 'type' 'mac80211'
     option 'macaddr' '00:0c:42:64:bf:70'
     option 'hwmode' '11na'
     option 'htmode' 'HT40-'
     list 'ht_capab' 'SHORT-GI-40'
     list 'ht_capab' 'TX-STBC'
     list 'ht_capab' 'RX-STBC1'
     list 'ht_capab' 'DSSS_CCK-40'
     option 'country' 'US'
     option 'channel' '44'
     option 'txpower' '1'

config 'wifi-iface'
     option 'device' 'radio0'
     option 'ssid' 'ath9kTest2'
     option 'encryption' 'none'
     option 'network' 'wan'
     option 'mode' 'adhoc'

-- 
regards;

Peizhao