maemo.org Bugzilla – Bug 12237
Default WiFi power-saving mode 'Maximum' is unreliable and performs poorly
Last modified: 2012-02-17 15:56:16 UTC
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
SOFTWARE VERSION: 20.2010.36-2 (also CSSU) EXACT STEPS LEADING TO PROBLEM: (Explain in detail what you do (e.g. tap on OK) and what you see (e.g. message Connection Failed appears)) 1. Connect to a WiFi network for the first time (or manually set power-saving mode for an existing connection to Maximum). 2. Note that performance is unreliable, yet improves in speed and reliability (pages hang during loading, and often time out) if a continuous ping is left running (presumably, this inhibits power-saving) 3. Switch to Intermediate power saving and notice the performance improves without any need of continuous ping EXPECTED OUTCOME: Power-saving doesn't cause my http requests to time out ACTUAL OUTCOME: Http requests time out frequently and pages load very slowly with Maximum power-saving, unless I run a continuous ping REPRODUCIBILITY: always EXTRA SOFTWARE INSTALLED: Lots OTHER COMMENTS: I propose either fixing the Maximum power-saving option so that it does not come at a cost in reliability/speed, or changing the default power-saving for new connections to 'Intermediate'
I suggest to have a comprehensive list of ALL (recent and future) wifi APs that don't support proper powersaving, and the way they can get detected. We then can implement automatic setting of PSM into CSSU. Oh no wa can't as switching PSM is a bit tricky and can't get done per AP, as you need to power down and restart the wifi chip for a changed PSM to take effect. INVALID (if you haven't guessed yet)
According to Nokia the UI for Maemo5 is frozen, hence WONTFIX. Feel free to move it to Maemo 5 Community Updates product though, in case the codebase is open...
Okay, I accept Nokia's position on this. Joerg, I don't know if you use an N900, but this happens to me with most APs I use. I proposed two options, and you chose to pick one line of attack for one of the options I proposed, ignore the other option (saner defaults), and consequently mark it invalid - why?
Thanks, Andre
(In reply to comment #3) > Okay, I accept Nokia's position on this. > > Joerg, I don't know if you use an N900, but this happens to me with most APs I > use. I proposed two options, and you chose to pick one line of attack for one > of the options I proposed, ignore the other option (saner defaults), and > consequently mark it invalid - why? Sorry, no offense intended. It's just this is an age old known problem, usually attributed to borked APs, WFM (and a lot of others: [2011-05-19 16:29:49] <ShadowJK> I recently bought a wifi ap brand A and usb wireless adapter brand A. PSM didn't work :) [2011-05-19 16:29:59] <ShadowJK> but it did work with N900 ) and there's just so much you can do about it as the management of PSM is inside wifi chip fw anyway, which we can't possibly fix (even if it were N900's fault which it isn't. No objections about setting "default" to PSM medium - it applies to first boot only in the end. NB PSM is a global setting, even though it's hidden at end of the AP/connection specific ones. cheers and sorry for inappropriate answer /j
Are you sure you're not confusing TxPwr with Power Saving mode? N900's Internet Connections applet in Settings allows per-AP power-saving mode selection (logically). Whereas if you elect to change the TxPwr (10mW or 100mW), the Internet Connections applet warns you this will apply globally (all connections), and that an immediate power down and reinitialisation of the card will ensue. If I'm missing something, please forgive me, but all outward signs are that power-saving mode is per-AP.
(In reply to comment #6) > Are you sure you're not confusing TxPwr with Power Saving mode? Indeed, you're right. /j
so a scheme to try associating to unknown AP with low/no PSM, then figure if the AP can do proper PSM, by either * look up in a list of MAC (ranges), and/or * some interactive thing possibly exploiting some server to find if wifi stalls on higher PSM, and then setting the config for this AP accordingly, this might actually make some sense. Icing on top would be a way to share the config for MAC ranges generated locally by heuristics / probing / manual setting, and then confirmed by user, to some central database. Probably such a thing could get implemented as an installable pkg not needing any patches to the core system (i.e. no need for cssu to deal with it). /j
Yes, I just thought that having Maximum power saving the default is quite un-user-friendly, given how prevalent buggy APs are. Even just changing the default would be a huge win, IMHO. It's one less thing I have to do each time I use a new AP (and going through all those dialogs to reach power management is a royal pain). If further dev resources were available, a small (even CLI, with launcher) app could bring down the interface and re-up it with maximum power-saving, run a bunch of tests against the current AP and make a recommendation accordingly. Or we could go further and implement what you have suggested.