Joined: 06 Jun 2006 Posts: 7492 Location: Dresden, Germany
Posted: Mon Dec 20, 2021 11:26 Post subject:
turbo qam 256 is a non standard feature. not all clients will support it. so dont use it if your client isnt capable of doing it. regarding older builds. in some older builds turboqam was not working due a bug which i just fixed recently. i just tested turboqam on 9980 and 9984 this morning with my iphone and it worked.
known working chipsets are ralink/mediatek, broadcom and for qca chipsets only in theory. depends on the driver implementation of the vendor. qca does allow it. but linux/mac80211 does not support it. in fact qam256 has been removed from mac80211 and ath10k in official version. in dd-wrt i reimplemented it some years ago
so if you cannot handle "non standard" features. please dont use it _________________ "So you tried to use the computer and it started smoking? Sounds like a Mac to me.." - Louis Rossmann https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eL_5YDRWqGE&t=60s
Can you narrow down to exactly which is the last working build, or first broken for your specific clients?
If I were to guess, I'd pick build 45687 as the key change since it reflects a Kernel update ( https://svn.dd-wrt.com/changeset/45687 ). However, without access to the intermediate builds, I couldn't say for sure.
With that said:
BrainSlayer wrote:
turbo qam 256 is a non standard feature. not all clients will support it. so dont use it if your client isnt capable of doing it. regarding older builds. in some older builds turboqam was not working due a bug which i just fixed recently. i just tested turboqam on 9980 and 9984 this morning with my iphone and it worked.
known working chipsets are ralink/mediatek, broadcom and for qca chipsets only in theory. depends on the driver implementation of the vendor. qca does allow it. but linux/mac80211 does not support it. in fact qam256 has been removed from mac80211 and ath10k in official version. in dd-wrt i reimplemented it some years ago
so if you cannot handle "non standard" features. please dont use it
Thank you BS. I suppose when it was "working" with the older builds, perhaps it wasn't working at all! The Android phone I'm using has a Snapdragon 865 chipset which (I'd think) is pretty standard - I guess it's possible the implementation of its drivers could be flawed as well.
