Re: problem on ACS
From: Luis R. Rodriguez <hidden>
Date: 2011-07-26 18:21:41
On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 7:46 PM, MingAnn Ng [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi Luis, this is what I'd got after applying logarithm identities patch that you provide: 2412 MHz: -175.357726 2417 MHz: -inf 2422 MHz: -inf 2427 MHz: -inf 2432 MHz: -inf 2437 MHz: -inf 2442 MHz: -inf 2447 MHz: -inf 2452 MHz: -inf 2457 MHz: -inf 2462 MHz: -inf 2467 MHz: -inf 2472 MHz: -inf 5180 MHz: -187.707255 5200 MHz: -186.721397 5220 MHz: -186.067982 5240 MHz: -186.584516 5260 MHz: -186.872511 5280 MHz: -184.567340 5300 MHz: -185.224387 5320 MHz: -185.794143 5500 MHz: -189.525424 5520 MHz: -189.417120 5540 MHz: -189.705191 5560 MHz: -189.639734 5580 MHz: -190.396324 5600 MHz: -189.503429 5620 MHz: -189.685961 5640 MHz: -189.421184 5660 MHz: -189.814113 5680 MHz: -190.737770 5700 MHz: -190.546318 Ideal freq: 2417 MHz
Hm, as for the new values -- they look very different from what you had gotten before so the math went wrong somewhere.. gotta revise that a bit more carefully.
The result is almost the same as the version before applying the patch. the -inf still fall on those channel. and those channel are indeed very busy in my lab. Is there any other solution which I can try to get a better result out of it? I haven't try on the latest patch for hostapd which you uploaded. Is the acs application work along with hostapd to calculate the interference level?
No, the ACS implementation on hostapd simply uses the internal code from hostapd so its much easier to write, the acs.git code is completely independent so adding anything there is just a bit harder, for example adding a scan prior to the ACS work. Please do try the hostapd patches to see if you get a good channel, and enable debugging to see the values you get. We do want to avoid the -inf stuff completely. Getting that means our data type is not sufficient for our data. The difficult aspect of this code is that the values range from fractional values to extremely large values.. Luis