Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 7 Mar 2004 13:01:40 +0100 | From | Thomas Mueller <> | Subject | Re: 2.6 much worse than 2.4 on poor wlan reception |
| |
Hi Denis,
> > blade:~# iwconfig eth1 > > eth1 IEEE 802.11-DS ESSID:"WLAN" Nickname:"Prism I" > > Mode:Managed Frequency:2.412GHz Access Point:00:60:B3:17:F8:8C > > Bit Rate:11Mb/s Tx-Power=15 dBm Sensitivity:1/3 > > Retry min limit:8 RTS thr:off Fragment thr:off > > Encryption key:[ secret ] Security mode:open > > Power Management:off > > Link Quality:1/92 Signal level:-101 dBm Noise level:-149 dBm > > I have Prism 2.5 cards. I run them with hostap driver. > Link quality of 1/92 is very bad. You are on the edge > of losing connection. (At least this is the case for > my hardware).
Yes I am. When I move some meters in the room I loose connection with kernel 2.4 too.
> Let's see how much errors do you have. Do this: > > # cat /proc/net/wireless /proc/net/dev [..]
tmm@blade:~$ cat /proc/net/wireless /proc/net/dev Inter-| sta-| Quality | Discarded packets | Missed | WE face | tus | link level noise | nwid crypt frag retry misc | beacon | 16 eth1: 0000 0. 150. 107. 0 8 0 0 0 0 Inter-| Receive | Transmit face |bytes packets errs drop fifo frame compressed multicast|bytes packets errs drop fifo colls carrier compressed lo: 58298 881 0 0 0 0 0 0 58298 881 0 0 0 0 0 0 eth0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3456 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 eth1: 532101 1336 0 0 0 0 0 0 223614 1299 466 0 0 0 0 0 sit0: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
That's really interesting, thanks for that hint! Transmit: 1299 packets, 466 errs - argh.
When I can't transmit anything 'errs' increases by one every few seconds.
As comparison: kernel 2.4.20 has 1743 packets and 9 errs at the moment. So the interesting question is: why is the error rate with kernel 2.6 that high?
> > There was a break when netio transfered the 2k blocks. > > > > My log is full of entries like this one: > > Mar 1 17:54:12 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP Out of Range > > (0004) > > Mar 1 17:54:12 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP In Range (0005) > > Mar 1 17:54:16 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP Out of Range > > (0004) > > Mar 1 17:54:16 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP In Range (0005) > > Mar 1 17:54:19 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP Out of Range > > (0004) > > Mar 1 17:54:20 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP In Range (0005) > > Mar 1 17:54:22 blade kernel: eth1: New link status: AP Out of Range > > (0004) > > > > Kernel 2.4 works far better in the poor reception situation I have, > > anyone any idea what I could do without moving the AP or laptop? > > When I'm near my AP everything works fine with 2.6 too. > > Is your orinoco driver is the same for 2.4 and 2.6? > Maybe 2.6 one has a bit lower max retry count or some such?
2.6.2 has version 0.13e, 2.4.23 has 0.13d. I diffed the orinoco.* but there are only small changes.
> > BTW: removing the PCMCIA card when it's in use freezes my system > > completely, that was no problem with 2.4. > > No oops? No SysRq?
Nope, it just freezes :-(
-- MfG Thomas Mueller - http://www.tmueller.com for pgp key (95702B3B) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |