yes it does but not 320 yet
i do have 320, confirmed by wifiman tool, its enabled and working
1 Like
just added a pull request from my repo to your openwrt branch https://github.com/danpawlik/openwrt/tree/be14-janusz-v13-luci-rmandrad
if it helps
I removed branch, sorry. Could you do another one?
EDIT: I will take a look. There are many changes in your PR. Especially that you have changed indentation and there is no 2 lines to check, but whole file is different. Now comparing difference of those files takes time.
EDIT:
Added branch with most of your patches: be14-janusz-v13-luci-rmandrad
1 Like
done ... i don't get any issues merging upstream ... I presume your changes + mine etc
note - on feeds.conf.default ignore the mtk-openwrt-feeds
I pushed all of the pending PRs that Janusz made to the main branch ~1 hour ago.
10 Likes
I have Issue with Snapshot OpenWRT (Official One ) Speeds on phone is higher but on laptop is slower ......
Laptop Specs : RTX 4080 + AMD 7900 + Wi-Fi Qualcomm
I installed the Latest driver for WIFI on my computer but no improvement
On BPI-R4 System that developed by BPI-R4 Company
I'm getting same speeds on WIFI ....
Opinion: (maybe right or wrong)
I think BPI-R4 image (by company) using Driver on their build for WiFi that matching with most of devices WiFi but this image its not matching with all Devices driver ...
Official OpenWRT (Snapshot-Up to date )
WIFI- 160mhz
On My Laptop (Alienware AMD 19) : 60mb/s
On My Phone Samsung : 400 mb/s
I approached to BPI-R4 Team .They informed me to use their system to test their system BPI-R4 OpenWRT 21 but I can't add anything on image
BPI OpenWRT Image
on WiFi 6G & 5G I got a good speeds like ethernet
This my configuration when I used official OpenWRT
root@OpenWrt:~# cat /etc/config/wireless
config wifi-device 'radio0'
option type 'mac80211'
option path 'soc/11300000.pcie/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/0000:01:00.0'
option band '2g'
option channel '1'
option htmode 'HE20'
option disabled '1'
config wifi-iface 'default_radio0'
option device 'radio0'
option network 'lan'
option mode 'ap'
option ssid 'OpenWrt'
option encryption 'none'
config wifi-device 'radio1'
option type 'mac80211'
option path 'soc/11300000.pcie/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/0000:01:00.0+1'
option band '5g'
option channel 'auto'
option htmode 'HE160'
option country 'JP'
option cell_density '0'
config wifi-iface 'default_radio1'
option device 'radio1'
option network 'lan'
option mode 'ap'
option ssid 'OpenWrt-5g'
option encryption 'psk2'
option key 'm123456789'
config wifi-device 'radio2'
option type 'mac80211'
option path 'soc/11300000.pcie/pci0000:00/0000:00:00.0/0000:01:00.0+2'
option band '6g'
option channel 'auto'
option htmode 'HE80'
option disabled '1'
config wifi-iface 'default_radio2'
option device 'radio2'
option network 'lan'
option mode 'ap'
option ssid 'OpenWrt'
option encryption 'none'
Good day, an hour ago I built a build from official sources from the main repository. The settings for selecting wifi mode BE are still unavailable, I configured everything by making changes to the wireless config file and tested it, all three wifi ranges are called openwrt and my mt7927 adapter on the computer connected to channel 36 5 GHz, as a result, the download speed is about 25 Mbit, the return is about 130 Mbit. Yesterday I tested the build of the respected @rmandrad and there I was able to connect to channel 37 in the 6 GHz range and the download speed was in the 900 Mbit range, the return is 800 Mbit, that is, almost the maximum from my provider. We are waiting further and hope for improvements in the near future.
Good morning, I have the same card as you, Mediatek MT7927 WiFi card on PC.
I have set the same channel as you in 6G, but it does not connect. Have you made any changes to the configuration when you do it from the web?
Powered by LuCI dev branch (24.274.61815~268885d) / mda-bananapi4-openwrt 6.6.52 (r27689-fc5db1ab29)
1 Like
I tried yesterday rmandrad's OpenWRT fork with my be14 NIC and be200 Intel card laptop. I am running a bleeding edge distro that has all the latest firmware.
I am in PL, have patched the regulatory DB to allow 320MHz (Intel's regulatory limits 6GHz to 480MHz, also I found nothing in regulatory documents to support the 160MHz limit, likely the regulatory DB European entries were written when no one thought there could be 320MHz WLAN channels).
4096-QAM works, but needs almost perfect reception.
WED simply doesn't work.
On 5GHz channel 100 the channel width is limited to 80MHz somehow. I can set a network to 160MHz, but the connection always uses a 80MHz channel. I strongly suppose this is a BE200 issue.
On 6GHz, channel width 160MHz works perfectly well. Channel width 320MHz is... interesting.
When inspecting iw dev wlp87s0f0 link on my laptop, the TX part starts correctly, 320MHz and the best modulation it can get (4096-QAM included). The RX part starts at 6Mbps 20MHz, then once I start a bigger transfer, it changes progressively to use wider channel sizes and better modulations, eventually ending up at 320MHz, but it quickly degrades and stabilizes at 320MHz EHT-MCS 0 which is the lowest rate modulation (BPSK).
I think I am perfectly satisfied with having 6GHz 160MHz for today and I will be adding it to my main network, especially as I bought the hardware more for future-proofing, but I share my results regardless. Great work!
Good day, i set all channels name to OpenWrt, region to RU, bands to auto, mode to BE.
Yeah the regulatory db is outdated for sure, I can't set 320Mhz when I set the country to FR even though it's allowed here.
I am an openwrt noob though, what did you do to patch it?
Ok thanks, I'm going to put what you told me and I'll do it, but I've configured 5G with the country that I always have and the WiFi is not associated with it, I'll put what you told me and I'll tell you.
Ok thanks, I put all the radios in the same country, they work, I need 6g and wifi to be associated so that they all work, now I change the country where I had 6g before that worked for me and I see it, thank you very much.
It seems that all the radios have to be in the same country
I did this, but it didn't really work (perhaps a package wireless-regdb was taken from mtk-openwrt-feeds, or I didn't properly do a cleanup):
diff --git a/package/firmware/wireless-regdb/patches/100-poland-6ghz-320mhz.patch b/package/firmware/wireless-regdb/patches/100-poland-6ghz-320mhz.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..ddb0b6052d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/package/firmware/wireless-regdb/patches/100-poland-6ghz-320mhz.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+diff --git a/db.txt b/db.txt
+index 956cfd0..88c9830 100644
+--- a/db.txt
++++ b/db.txt
+@@ -1547,7 +1547,7 @@ country PL: DFS-ETSI
+ # short range devices (ETSI EN 300 440-1)
+ (5725 - 5875 @ 80), (25 mW)
+ # 6 GHz band
+- (5945 - 6425 @ 160), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, wmmrule=ETSI
++ (5945 - 6425 @ 320), (23), NO-OUTDOOR, wmmrule=ETSI
+ # 60 GHz band channels 1-4 (ETSI EN 302 567)
+ (57000 - 66000 @ 2160), (40)
+
Then I simply changed build_dir/target-aarch64_cortex-a53_musl/wireless-regdb-2024.07.04/db.txt and reran the build.
This is about the same behavior I saw from my BE200. Qualcomm NCM865 also suffers from link degradation over time, but not to the same extent. At this time it's really hard to pinpoint the issue, as drivers for both NICs are still in no better shape than the BPI-R4 driver.
1 Like
By the way, I just wanted to share the speedtest I got on this firmware using the 6Ghz band at 320Mhz (country currently set to JP)
I am roughly 5 meters away from the BPI R4 in the same room, the client is a windows 11 24H2 computer running a BE200 on the latest driver.
8 Likes
wow! these are super dupa speeds mon ami... yeah 5m does help but anyhow I am jealous 
1 Like
Good afternoon, we will try with Japan. I will try with my API, which is Unitet Arab Emirates, with Japan. My card is Mediatek MT7927.
It is 1 meter from the router.
With Japan, your card will be Intel and mine will be MediaTek, it doesn't make sense
With Japan, it will be your card which is Intel and mine MediaTek, it doesn't make sense
The only thing if you look at 5G is that I have both slots at 160Mhz
In 6G, one at 160MHZ and the other at 20Mhz.
How do you have this point?
