From owner-freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org Mon Apr 11 16:13:02 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-wireless@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70764B0B50F for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:13:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ig0-x232.google.com (mail-ig0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C1401726 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:13:02 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: by mail-ig0-x232.google.com with SMTP id f1so65180957igr.1 for ; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:13:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to; bh=YLuuixY0jIsnGXJKdFSoBQiW9QMBtiMBIoRErl5nD1g=; b=rEhKi8jr8gF+C4QdoMsSyqoK67Ev/96HiGPClu1VRijjcOlI3Ll4Jc6OZsquRvT9uW L/om9/JxhjyOg+oJGRrcP+oOl4p0v7S7AbG2k0+5ntBbPgF+Ge3iKf3PQuTtQF9Zcr0b PGiI35JmgnDZHfOCqut3FC9DgOZXEPKoAthZ9Q/zNuGynhZZk0z6XiPAY+sLiPON1mJE +xdsXQjl9aiQULfLHqUNjCA34KvqfR9COPc3lmN5QXafL7pka1KPHB4RshJY/z7SPLei lg6aK+Z1dKLBVeuKK6fWiMXbawukx//4gFjQRhP0IfeQYqgxYd2bQEltPsHQBdZ+aJcJ zzSQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to; bh=YLuuixY0jIsnGXJKdFSoBQiW9QMBtiMBIoRErl5nD1g=; b=GqSlNyy5o7iUQ0L1/7R82RBHZXD7H5fiTBJ7C+knteYlSpV0WCRg4BZcvdYccwppis XirRKjhIeqALN8u7AJ6ba1QTm8MZbNh2Hk4l5gLwBaVNm6HVGmumVXfS+21cSM85HUkZ EGJcnGlHcAC05MAIKJ3Y9Qp+OMljs4RwMuKk7Rg+Dn/DBRF1anOODh3dWerQZN5B+KKI LIncVTkZVXD8IjBmlGhPT2ZFH3uwMS4NTaDOIOOkbW7ZmOwSJKClcmPxHrViE/cBVvIX mmmeZXMLDfiuCsiDpuG/tQbrjtEX2CK4M82BxpcJKAewZ5bjQ9HylRHZZQu/0QEZ/q9Y NAwQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVl7dluAjc/Q1o2SSrf11qjMIf/yiop60ix79mfHUXaEuOlv6yUw/syai8U1cp9DjchBfmS/9mobLBBBQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.103.232 with SMTP id fz8mr3134176igb.61.1460391181595; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:13:01 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.36.14.19 with HTTP; Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:13:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:13:01 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: PqMN9aMHkMRlGyStXll8v_VJyls Message-ID: Subject: Re: urtwn and rssi reporting From: Adrian Chadd To: "freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-BeenThere: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussions of 802.11 stack, tools device driver development." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:13:02 -0000 Hi, Right. It's because with A-MPDU decap now we're getting the PHY notifications once per frame, not for all frames. I bet TSF is the same. I'll commit something I have here that only updates the RSSI value for a node when we see a value, and just reuses the previous value. I don't know yet if we get the RSSI on the first or last subframe of an A-MPDU; we should test that and document it. -adrian On 5 April 2016 at 21:00, Adrian Chadd wrote: > hiya, > > I've noticed that RSSI reporting during active traffic seems > unreliable. I'm guessing that we're only getting RSSI reports every > handful of frames now (which may be because we're doing RX AMPDU; not > sure!) and so the report tends to be unreliable. > > Any ideas? > > > -a