Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semaphore to mutex

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: <mvtodevnull@...>
Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki <rjw@...>, Michael Buesch <mb@...>, Daniel Walker <dwalker@...>, Ray Lee <ray-lk@...>, Simon Holm Thøgerse <odie@...>, <matthias.kaehlcke@...>, <linux-kernel@...>, <linux@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, <kjwinchester@...>, <jonathan@...>, <akpm@...>, <bcm43xx-dev@...>
Date: Friday, December 14, 2007 - 10:27 pm

mvtodevnull@gmail.com wrote:

No. On my BCM4311/1, my transfer rate peaked at about 12 Mbs with bcm43xx, but increased to 20 Mbs 
with b43. These tests were done with iperf with a server running running on a second computer 
connected by wire to my router. These rates are for 802.11g. When my interface was locked at 11 Mbs, 
the transfer rate was the expected 5.3-5.5 Mbs with both drivers.


I suspect that mac80211 is doing something that your router does not like. Do you have any chance to 
capture the traffic between your computer and the router by using a second wireless computer running 
kismet or wireshark? A look at the differences between b43 and bcm43xx should show the reason.

Larry



--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Fri Dec 14, 8:51 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., Larry Finger, (Fri Dec 14, 10:27 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sat Dec 15, 7:18 pm)
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., Rafael J. Wysocki, (Sun Dec 16, 10:35 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., John W. Linville, (Fri Dec 14, 10:14 am)
Re: [PATCH 3/3] net: wireless: bcm43xx: big_buffer_sem semap..., John W. Linville, (Thu Dec 13, 10:23 am)