ath9k/ath10k DFS testing / certification

Adrian Chadd adrian at
Tue Jan 24 08:26:57 PST 2017

On 24 January 2017 at 06:53, Jean-Pierre Tosoni <jp.tosoni at> wrote:
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : ath10k [mailto:ath10k-bounces at] De la part de
>> Adrian Chadd
>> Envoyé : lundi 16 janvier 2017 18:43
>> À : Jean-Pierre Tosoni
>> Cc : Cedric VONCKEN; ath10k at
>> Objet : Re: ath9k/ath10k DFS testing / certification
>> hiya,
>> Yeah - i was a part of that discussion. :) That's why I was pointing out
>> that likely I'm going to bug QCA to get this fixed when the time is right.
>> So, time is right :)
>> Did you do DFS certification for AP/master devices, or just client?
> We did it for both AP and client modes.
> We had the same problem with IPERF than Simon, and we solved that by defining a huge packet size and IPERF would send it every now and then just enough to meet the throughput required.

The traffic duty cycle stuff was always a pain to get "right" when I
was last doing this (pre ath10k hardware.)

Is this just for your local testing, or is this something the testing
house / FCC / etc defines?

(Yes, I know about the traffic duty cycle definitions in the FCC spec
and how that changed over time, but I also remember how different
locations/labs had subtly different testing setups with different
"bursty" traffic.)


More information about the ath10k mailing list