RT73USB still slow...

Live forum: http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/viewtopic.php?t=4703

hkoster1

29-03-2008 11:16:16

Hi, the rt73usb driver for my Linksys WUSB54GC adapter worked with the 2.6.24 kernel (Debian), but was excruciatingly slow. I have now installed the 2.6.25-rc7 kernel, and while the rt73usb driver works here as well, it is still rather slow. The following data relate to an ADSL2 connection rated (nominally) at 8000Mbps, via a Linksys WAG200G router/modem using WPA-PSK for security

1. With the Linksys WUSB54GC adapter, using the rt73usb driver average speed about 2.2Mbps

2. With the NetGear WG111v2 adapter, using the rtl8187 driver average speed about 5.7Mbps

3. With a wired Ethernet connection average speed about 6.7Mbps.

The good news is that the current rt73usb driver has increased the speed about 10-fold compared to the driver included in 2.6.24. The bad news is that there is still some way to go as far as speed is concerned.

(Edited those darned units...)

SaTaN

25-04-2008 09:01:00

[quote18lsdxid]The following data relate to an ADSL2 connection rated (nominally) at 8000Mbps,[/quote18lsdxid]

8Gbps W00t that's fast !!1
(sorry, could... not... resist...)

I experience the following problem

It starts fast enough (i only got 1Mbps DSL ( ), but after some time the connection speed drops to 0 bps, and after some time, it recovers.

I think that has to du something eith the temperature of the stick ...

alphabeta

25-05-2008 17:39:26

I have a similar problem with the wusb54gc (
using 2.5.25 (Fedora 9), fresh from connection I get download speeds that shoot up to 1.5mb/s or so, and pings in the low 10s, which rapidly deteriorates to throughput of 100kb/s and pings in the thousands ( And I mean RAPIDLY, take a look at this ping started directly upon connection
[code3oeh6uya]PING www.l.google.com (64.233.169.99) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=8 ttl=235 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=9 ttl=235 time=18.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=10 ttl=235 time=20.4 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=11 ttl=235 time=19.4 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=12 ttl=235 time=21.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=13 ttl=235 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=14 ttl=235 time=20.4 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=15 ttl=235 time=25.9 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=16 ttl=235 time=20.9 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=17 ttl=235 time=19.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=18 ttl=235 time=43.7 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=19 ttl=235 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=20 ttl=235 time=17.2 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=21 ttl=235 time=22.5 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=22 ttl=235 time=24.1 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=23 ttl=235 time=20.0 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=24 ttl=235 time=28.7 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=25 ttl=235 time=31.7 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=26 ttl=235 time=20.0 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=27 ttl=235 time=16.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=28 ttl=235 time=23.1 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=29 ttl=235 time=16.2 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=30 ttl=235 time=110 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=31 ttl=235 time=25.1 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=32 ttl=235 time=266 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=33 ttl=235 time=238 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=34 ttl=235 time=106 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=35 ttl=235 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=36 ttl=235 time=395 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=37 ttl=235 time=545 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=38 ttl=235 time=440 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=39 ttl=235 time=477 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=40 ttl=235 time=760 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=41 ttl=235 time=450 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=42 ttl=235 time=698 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=43 ttl=235 time=963 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=44 ttl=235 time=930 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=45 ttl=235 time=1313 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=46 ttl=235 time=1135 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=47 ttl=235 time=1418 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=48 ttl=235 time=1331 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=49 ttl=235 time=1364 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=50 ttl=235 time=1607 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=51 ttl=235 time=1682 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=52 ttl=235 time=1493 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=53 ttl=235 time=1721 ms
64 bytes from yo-in-f99.google.com (64.233.169.99): icmp_seq=54 ttl=235 time=1976 ms
^C
--- www.l.google.com ping statistics ---
57 packets transmitted, 47 received, 17% packet loss, time 56188ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 16.258/467.247/1976.060/601.728 ms, pipe 2
[/code3oeh6uya]
And it hovers around 1000-2000ms. Downloads get limited to about 100kb/s. The wired connections in my house get around 3Mb/s, which I would of course like to have but the ping is the bigger issue for me. My signal strength is a consistent 85-90% to a wrt600n, so I'm having trouble identifying the problem (
I can reconnect again, and watch a download shoot up to ~1.5mb/s just to fall back down to 100kb/s with a 15 second period (

PS. Thanks for all the work you guys do, this driver is the only reason I can post this message at all o (web pages works fine, never time out, which seems strange considering the latency)

IvD

25-05-2008 17:47:35

You can force the rate to be highe by doing iwconfig wlan0 rate 54M

alphabeta

25-05-2008 17:58:25

The driver automatically seems to automatically set mine for 54mb/s
[code1vt9lpro]
wmaster0 no wireless extensions.

wlan0 IEEE 802.11 ESSID:"linksys"
Mode:Managed Frequency:2.412 GHz Access Point: XX:XX:XX:XX:XX:XX
Bit Rate=54 Mb/s Tx-Power=16 dBm
Retry min limit:7 RTS thr:off Fragment thr=2352 B
Encryption key:off
Link Quality=89/100 Signal level=-62 dBm
Rx invalid nwid:0 Rx invalid crypt:0 Rx invalid frag:0
Tx excessive retries:0 Invalid misc:0 Missed beacon:0
[/code1vt9lpro]

I don't know if it's helpful, but I noticed some strange things in my log (the not in authentication state messages) on reconnects, and sometimes theres more of them.
also, the log fills up ad infinitum with CTS Protection..
[code1vt9lpro]
wlan0: Initial auth_alg=0
wlan0: authenticate with AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
wlan0: RX authentication from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (alg=0 transaction=2 status=0)
wlan0: authenticated
wlan0: associate with AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
wlan0: RX AssocResp from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (capab=0x401 status=0 aid=1)
wlan0: associated
wlan0: switched to short barker preamble (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: Initial auth_alg=0
wlan0: authenticate with AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
wlan0: Initial auth_alg=0
wlan0: authenticate with AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
wlan0: RX authentication from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (alg=0 transaction=2 status=0)
wlan0: authenticated
wlan0: associate with AP xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
wlan0: authentication frame received from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx, but not in authenticate state - ignored
wlan0: RX disassociation from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (reason=7)
wlan0: RX ReassocResp from xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx (capab=0x401 status=0 aid=1)
wlan0: associated
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: switched to short barker preamble (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection disabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
wlan0: CTS protection enabled (BSSID=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx)
[/code1vt9lpro]
Thanks again

alphabeta

28-05-2008 04:30:00

for what it's worth, downgrading to 2.5.24 (ubuntu hardy) fixed the problem entirely (low pings, average 1.5Mbps on downloads). Not sure if this was a problem with the disto (fedora) or the driver included in the new kernel.

Gutmensch

02-06-2008 20:17:34

I'd second that, I've got about 4 Mbit/s speed on this Logilink Wireless Device, but only if using the legacy rt73 module, with rt73usb it's maybe at 2-2,5 Mbit/s and the worst thing is some kind of latency, which makes it slow (e.g. 4 pings, 3 answers, 1 error - and not by accident).

rt73.ko works really fine with no problems, except for being a little slow.