Iw dev phy1-sta0 set bitrates legacy-2.4 1 ht-mcs-2.4 not set TX speed to 1Mbit

OWRT 24.10.1 Redmi AX6(IPQ807x)

I execute "iw dev phy1-sta0 set bitrates legacy-2.4 1 ht-mcs-2.4" not set TX speed to 1Mbit
I try 1 and 2 Mbit, all less then 5.5 set 5.5(6Mbit)

Can anyone tell me if this is a new feature of iw, IPQ driver or am I being stupid? Everything worked before.

Why are you initiating raw commands instead of editing /etc/config/wireless

?

And how can I fix it from /etc/config/wireless ? I don't even know how to do it.
And from the command line it's faster when you're doing an experiment.

:confused: All wireless configurations should be done from that file.

Here's how from the command line:

Faster than a checkbox and Save/Applying?

Cool.

1 Like

Checkbox Enabled
изображение

изображение
It says ap and adhoc mode only.

Am I misunderstanding something?!

I try on STA mode.

In OWRT 23.05.5 all work as I expect.

Yes.

Not supported_rates.

Since editing is done in /etc/config/wireless and not via raw iw commands - it's not clear what's not working "as expected".

But check box enabled!

What are you expecting?

And why?

1 Like

Yes, OK. And what behavior do you expect?

BTW - You have alot of invalid configs for legacy rates.

I expect sta interface set 1Mbit Tx rate.

For transmit data on 1Mbit bitrate.

Not sure that would be legal - I'd have to research.

You are about BEEMs?

I don't understand your response. Try using the default wireless configurations and adding legacy_rates to that.

What parameters are wrong?

I try. But previously everything worked with this configuration.

You have WiFi 5 and 6 parameters and desire a WiFi 1 configuration.

OK - if you insist. Feel free to kludge it via non-OpenWrt command line hacks.

I use iw command from oficial repository.


With this config
Result the same :frowning:

We must have a language barrier. OpenWrt wireless configurations are done in the UCI file /etc/config/wireless or via LuCI web GUI.

OpenWrt isn't configured via raw commands like iw - and definitely not using both iw and [L]UCI methods.