Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2012 13:14:37 +0800 From: "Wright, Brett" <Brett.Wright@cooperindustries.com> To: "Adrian Chadd" <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: freebsd-wireless@freebsd.org, Kim Culhan <w8hdkim@gmail.com> Subject: RE: Atheros DFS radar detection Message-ID: <475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC131606692EA4@APEVS1.ap.ci.root> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=cC3SbtgRuVyjjseLg0E9SA1UBRh5fh_j1ROxo-p6PCw@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAKZxVQU-%2BW9AP4a9W0PGyLmBOa1GVOrGcLC8bp5zW_=K%2Bv3tHA@mail.gmail.com><475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC13160641D618@APEVS1.ap.ci.root><CAKZxVQWeOnw_kZWzuXfHSS-ssQfGVG=ybYK%2B%2B8EaqnFVe-rLpg@mail.gmail.com><CAJ-Vmon=NfyZW9vJRSNxTLZvJhobeCP-S1O3TxopNzArWunCCQ@mail.gmail.com><475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC13160661E6AC@APEVS1.ap.ci.root><CAJ-VmomJZD_NBM8=N1oD1a0XCFLoXoezStXHKLKCSGLBFrKT2Q@mail.gmail.com><475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC13160661F137@APEVS1.ap.ci.root><CAJ-Vmo=6HLXxYLG3u-oAndR66wtnSySYm5Rp7Jp5T6eyiPq7UQ@mail.gmail.com><475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC131606667F85@APEVS1.ap.ci.root> <CAJ-Vmo=cC3SbtgRuVyjjseLg0E9SA1UBRh5fh_j1ROxo-p6PCw@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Adrian, > -----Original Message----- > From: adrian.chadd@gmail.com [mailto:adrian.chadd@gmail.com] On Behalf > Of Adrian Chadd > Sent: Saturday, 25 August 2012 3:52 AM >=20 > I haven't yet sat down and done actual radar pulse train detection > with the AR5212 and I know it's just going to plain suck at doing > chirps in a busy environment (as they just look like long pulses; > there's no FFT data to assist the software in decoding what's going > on) but it should be enough to get you started. >=20 That might be half my problem, the radar patterns I have to setup to get compliant detection increase the chance of false radar train detection (in combination with the false pulse detection). Reducing this false pulse detection has been the biggest help. If I tinker too much with the radar patterns I can't get compliant detection. > Have you tried these NICs on different hardware? I wonder if you're > seeing some kind of spur or board noise that's contributing to both > the false detections and the high noise floor calibration value. I > don't have an SR-5 here to test against I'm afraid.. >=20 I haven't tried other hardware because I'm working on an existing hardware platform where I have to use SR5 (mainly for the high Tx power etc). But makes sense that the SR5 is making this whole process more difficult... Thanks for all the help. Brett
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?475A4E02EFF4724A9E58F55A56AC131606692EA4>