[SOLVED] Updated wi-fi driver lost his edge?

kresica35 · 07-17-2015, 09:18 AM

The driver in matter is RTL8192CU fixed it some time ago following instruction: https://sites.google.com/site/easyli...and-0bda:8178-.

Since the last week or so the wi-fi signal dropped from 3.9 Mb/s to 1.4-1.5 Mb/s, currentlly it's arround 0.85-0.99 s depending on specific testing site. Don't recall of doing some major upgrades that could damage him in that period besides the updating of linux kernel required in instruction prior that new chipset driver.

My distro is Linux Mint 17.1 Rebecca Kernel Linux 3.13.0-44-generic Mate 1.8.1, network card is Level One WUA-0605. If I got the right shell inputs, outputs are:

Code:

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $ ifconfig
eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:1e:0b:64:67:c7  
          UP BROADCAST MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:0 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 
          RX bytes:0 (0.0 B)  TX bytes:0 (0.0 B)
          Interrupt:19 Memory:f0000000-f0020000 

lo        Link encap:Local Loopback  
          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
          inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:65536  Metric:1
          RX packets:1453 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:1453 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 
          RX bytes:378370 (378.3 KB)  TX bytes:378370 (378.3 KB)

wlan0     Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr 00:11:6b:41:52:9b  
          inet addr:192.168.0.23  Bcast:192.168.0.255  Mask:255.255.255.0
          inet6 addr: fe80::211:6bff:fe41:529b/64 Scope:Link
          UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST  MTU:1500  Metric:1
          RX packets:33973 errors:0 dropped:1334 overruns:0 frame:0
          TX packets:32791 errors:0 dropped:1 overruns:0 carrier:0
          collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000 
          RX bytes:36108160 (36.1 MB)  TX bytes:9602303 (9.6 MB)

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $

Code:

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $ iwconfig
wlan0     IEEE 802.11bg  ESSID:"Ilica"  Nickname:"<WIFI@REALTEK>"
          Mode:Managed  Frequency:2.412 GHz  Access Point: 00:24:D1:87:6F:8B   
          Bit Rate:54 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=75/100  Signal level=37/100  Noise level=0/100
          Rx invalid nwid:0  Rx invalid crypt:0  Rx invalid frag:0
          Tx excessive retries:0  Invalid misc:0   Missed beacon:0

lo        no wireless extensions.

eth0      no wireless extensions.

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $

Code:

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $ iwlist
Usage: iwlist [interface] scanning [essid NNN] [last]
              [interface] frequency 
              [interface] channel 
              [interface] bitrate 
              [interface] rate 
              [interface] encryption 
              [interface] keys 
              [interface] power 
              [interface] txpower 
              [interface] retry 
              [interface] ap 
              [interface] accesspoints 
              [interface] peers 
              [interface] event 
              [interface] auth 
              [interface] wpakeys 
              [interface] genie 
              [interface] modulation 
kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $

Code:

kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $ sudo lshw -C network
[sudo] password for kresica: 
  *-network               
       description: Ethernet interface
       product: 82566DM-2 Gigabit Network Connection
       vendor: Intel Corporation
       physical id: 19
       bus info: pci@0000:00:19.0
       logical name: eth0
       version: 02
       serial: 00:1e:0b:64:67:c7
       capacity: 1Gbit/s
       width: 32 bits
       clock: 33MHz
       capabilities: pm msi bus_master cap_list ethernet physical tp 10bt 10bt-fd 100bt 100bt-fd 1000bt-fd autonegotiation
       configuration: autonegotiation=on broadcast=yes driver=e1000e driverversion=2.3.2-k firmware=1.3-1 latency=0 link=no multicast=yes port=twisted pair
       resources: irq:43 memory:f0000000-f001ffff memory:f0025000-f0025fff ioport:2100(size=32)
  *-network
       description: Wireless interface
       physical id: 1
       bus info: usb@1:4
       logical name: wlan0
       serial: 00:11:6b:41:52:9b
       capabilities: ethernet physical wireless
       configuration: broadcast=yes driver=rtl8192cu ip=192.168.0.23 multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11bg
kresica@kresica-HP-Compaq-dc7800-Small-Form-Factor ~ $

So, what's the next step in boosting wi-fi again boss?

jdkaye · 07-18-2015, 02:00 AM

I'm curious about the out of sudo lshw -C network

Code:

*-network
       description: Wireless interface
       physical id: 1
       bus info: usb@1:4
       logical name: wlan0
       serial: 00:11:6b:41:52:9b
       capabilities: ethernet physical wireless
       configuration: broadcast=yes driver=rtl8192cu ip=192.168.0.23 multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11bg

Compare that with the output of my system.

Code:

  *-network
       description: Wireless interface
       physical id: 1
       bus info: usb@2:2.4
       logical name: wlan1
       serial: 00:0b:81:ab:19:0a
       capabilities: ethernet physical wireless
       configuration: broadcast=yes driver=r8712u ip=192.168.1.64 multicast=yes wireless=IEEE 802.11bgn

If you haven't inadvertently cut off the final letter of your output, you wifi adapter doesn't seem to support 802.11n. I before I switched adapters (to one that does support 802.11n I was getting speeds of just of 1MB/s (that's bytes not bits. When put in a dongle that did support 802.11n my speed immediately jumped to over 4MB/s (which was the advertised speed for my connection).
So do your really mean "bits" when talking about speed or is it bytes? If it's the latter then the lack of support for 802.11n may be the answer to your question.
jdk

ferrari · 07-18-2015, 02:37 AM

Code:

 Bit Rate:54 Mb/s   Sensitivity:0/0  
          Retry:off   RTS thr:off   Fragment thr:off
          Power Management:off
          Link Quality=75/100  Signal level=37/100  Noise level=0/100

There's no evidence that anything is wrong with your wireless connection. The signal level is reasonable and the modulation rate is good for 54Mbps. Your speed could well be to do with contention (congestion) with respect to your service provider's network.

kresica35 · 07-18-2015, 02:39 AM

@jdkaye:

I see. No that wasn't a typo, did a re-check of "sudo lshw -C network" in Terminal adapter doesn't seem to support 802.11n. I guess that setlles it than. Thanks!

jdkaye · 07-18-2015, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kresica35

@jdkaye:

I see. No that wasn't a typo, did a re-check of "sudo lshw -C network" in Terminal adapter doesn't seem to support 802.11n. I guess that setlles it than. Thanks!

You're quite welcome but it doesn't explain how you managed 3.9 MB/s the week before while using 802.11bg. Also are we talking about 3.9MB/s or 3.9Mb/s?
jdk

kresica35 · 07-18-2015, 11:25 AM

@jdkaye:

It was 3.9 Mb/s not 3.9 MB/s that one time. Never had thoose MB's in my wi-fi signal, why?

jdkaye · 07-18-2015, 01:17 PM

Because even 3.9 Mb/s in incredibly slow and 1.4 Mb/s makes a snail seem speedy. Can you do an online speed test and report back what speed you're getting. You can test your speed on this site.
jdk

ferrari · 07-18-2015, 05:34 PM

Where's the solution you claim? The logical approach would have been to compare wired speed tests against your wireless (assuming your router provides an ethernet port as well), or even against another (eg USB) wireless device. There's no evidence so far that there is an issue with your wireless connectivity.

kresica35 · 07-19-2015, 03:21 AM

Last results at speedtest.net: DL 1.73 Mbps; UL 0.37; PING 298 ms.
ISP's in my country in most cases aren't so keen as to servicing theirs infrastructure as to collecting bills, I think lower signal is mostly due to that.
But never mind that now. Provided speeds are sufficient for me to use the Internet for all of my needs - like say simultaneously running radio or movie in stream, downloading few torrents, and checking my e-mail. For instance.
That will have to do untill something better comes along.

If it's all the same to You, I'll be leaving this thread at peace now.

ferrari · 07-19-2015, 03:28 AM

Quote:

Last results at speedtest.net: DL 1.73 Mbps; UL 0.37; PING 298 ms.
ISP's in my country in most cases aren't so keen as to servicing theirs infrastructure as to collecting bills, I think lower signal is mostly due to that.

That's a shame. (BTW, the wifi signal level you reported was actually okay, so unlikely to be the reason for low throughput.)

Quote:

But never mind that now. Provided speeds are sufficient for me to use the Internet for all of my needs - like say simultaneously running radio or movie in stream, downloading few torrents, and checking my e-mail. For instance.
That will have to do untill something better comes along.

If it's all the same to You, I'll be leaving this thread at peace now.

Fine by me