Hi Alfred and PHY Ad Hoc Chairs,
We have updated the PDT for “UEQM and new MCS” to r2, according to latest motions and comments from last teleconf discussions.
Please add it to the PHY PDT SP list. I will briefly go through the changes before the SP.
Thanks,
Rui
From: Jiyang Bai <jiyangbai@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2024 10:25 PM
To: Rui Cao <rui.cao_2@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Alice Chen <alicel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sigurd Schelstraete <sschelstraete@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Ying Wang <Ying.Wang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; sun.bo1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; qinghua.li@xxxxxxxxx; juan.fang@xxxxxxxxx; ross.yujian@xxxxxxxxxx; kanke_wu@xxxxxxxxx; You-Wei.Chen@xxxxxxxxxxxx;
rethnakaran.pulikkoonattu@xxxxxxxxxxxx; aniruddh.rao@xxxxxxxxxxx; Sameer Vermani <svverman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; shimi.shilo@xxxxxxxxxx; dongguk.lim@xxxxxxx; shengquan.hu@xxxxxxxxxxxx; aiguo.yan@xxxxxxxxxxx; jianhan.liu@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Youhan Kim <youhank@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
yusuke.asai@xxxxxxx; gaoning1@xxxxxxxx; oded.redlich@xxxxxxxxxx; huang.qisheng@xxxxxxxxxx; yamada.ryota@xxxxxxxxxxx; humengshi@xxxxxxxxxx; llanante@xxxxxxxxxx; sara.norouziii@xxxxxxxxx; zhou.leiH@xxxxxxx; dongxiandong@xxxxxxxxxx; zhongke@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; cao.bo4@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [STDS-802-11-TGBN] 24/1985 PDT UEQM-New MCS
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button
|
Hi Rui,
Thanks for your detailed reply!
I have updated the UEQM that include BPSK to TBD. I understand and let's focus on D0.1 and discuss this later. I will submit a comment as your suggestion.
Regarding to your commnets on the table:
-
I have removed Number of patterns, the total patterns should be 14*3(i.e. pattern 0 NSS=1-3)+10*6 (i.e. pattern 1-3, NSS=1-3)=104.
-
For UEQM pattern 1~3, the MCS3 is changed to TBD following your comments about BPSK(blue pairs). For MCS x2, when MCS x2 is the highest order in UEQM patterns(s), there is no available coding rate for s-2 (i.e. BPSK) modulation scheme(red pairs). For this misunderstanding,
I think it is my mistake in the table discribtion. What I want to present is the available MCS of the highest modulation order (i.e. 's') in UEQM pattern , rather than all available MCS for UEQM patterns.
Mod \ Code rate
|
1/2
|
2/3
|
3/4
|
5/6
|
BPSK
|
MCS 0
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
QPSK
|
MCS 1
|
MCS x1
|
MCS 2
|
NA
|
16QAM
|
MCS 3
|
MCS x2
|
MCS 4
|
MCS x3
|
64QAM
|
NA
|
MCS 5
|
MCS 6
|
MCS 7
|
256QAM
|
NA
|
MCS x4
|
MCS 8
|
MCS 9
|
1K QAM
|
NA
|
NA
|
MCS 10
|
MCS 11
|
4K QAM
|
NA
|
NA
|
MCS 12
|
MCS 13
|
I believe the updated Table covers all UEQM pattern by indicating the highest MCS, but maybe not clear enough. Considering there are 104 types in total, I don't think it is a good way to directly list all them. Please find the updated table
in the attachment, please just regard the document as the reference, we could have more discussions after D0.1
Hi Jiyang,
Thank you for the quick update.
I prefer to skip this table for the PDT proposal to D0.1. TGbn has not decided whether the UEQM supports BPSK modulation or not, the updated table is not fully aligned with current
motion status. It is difficult to reflect that into the table. Better to submit comments to D0.1 and we can resolve it during comment resolution process.
Regarding to the updated table:
-
The last column “Number of patterns” seems not correct, do you count all Nss? Do we need this column?
-
The available MCS for UEQM pattern 1~3 seems not correct. Need to remove MCS3, but add MCS x2?
Thanks,
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button
|
Hi Rui,
Many thanks for your reply and comments.
As you suggest we could leave this for later comments, please also find the updated table in the attachment according to your comments.
Wish you and others have a good Christmas holiday!
Hi Jiyang,
Thank you for the review and the proposed UEQM coding table.
I see your intention to list the possible UEQM coding combination to be more clear. The UEQM limitation is clearly stated in 38.3.10.
“UEQM is used only in a UHR MU PPDU with non-MU-MIMO beamformed transmission. UEQM is used only with LDPC.
The combination of FEC coding rate and modulation order used in any spatial streams in UEQM transmission shall be a defined UHR-MCS.”
Current table only shows the possible coding rates for each QAM pattern and the total number of combinations, which does not seem very illustrative for your purpose.
Some 2D MCS table as in 11-24/498 will be more helpful?
Mod \ Code rate
|
1/2
|
2/3
|
3/4
|
5/6
|
BPSK
|
MCS 0
|
NA
|
NA
|
NA
|
QPSK
|
MCS 1
|
MCS x1
|
MCS 2
|
NA
|
16QAM
|
MCS 3
|
MCS x2
|
MCS 4
|
MCS x3
|
64QAM
|
NA
|
MCS 5
|
MCS 6
|
MCS 7
|
256QAM
|
NA
|
MCS x4
|
MCS 8
|
MCS 9
|
1K QAM
|
NA
|
NA
|
MCS 10
|
MCS 11
|
4K QAM
|
NA
|
NA
|
MCS 12
|
MCS 13
|
My general thought is that, since this table is mainly illustrative, for D0.1, current PDT is clear without ambiguity, we can leave for later comment resolution to add better illustration.
I am open to hear other’s opinion.
Thanks,
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button
|
Hi Rui,
Please find the updated version of my comments in the attachment.
Hi Rui,
Thanks for your efferts on this PDT!
In Table 38-X3, I notice that some MCS is not available for UEQM because of different coding rate in different modulation order(s).
-Value in the UEQM pattern subfield=1;
Stream 2 pattern is s-2=0, MCS= 0, i.e. BPSK and R_u=1/2.
Stream 1 can only choose MCS=3, i.e. 16-QAM and R_u=1/2. The other rate R-u= 3/4 is not available.
To clearly presents the available coding rates and summary all possible patterns of coding rate in UEQM, I added the Table 38-X4 right after Table 38-X3.
Please evaluate whether if it is necessary to add this table to do some indecations. And feel free if you have any commnets.
Thank you, Alice.
Update the motion list version to 26.
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report
this email' button
|
Hi Rui,
The changes look good. But the reference [1] is still 171r21. You may refer to the latest 171r26.
Regards,
Alice
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi All,
PDT is updated to r2 with the following changes (Track change ON):
·
Changes based on the comments from the teleconf 12/9.
·
New text added to reflect the newly passed motions on 12/19.
oThe non-MUMIMO User Info table is aligned with the updates prepared by
@Alice Chen and
@juan.fang@xxxxxxxxx for UHR-SIG PDT.
oMotion list and motion document reference update
Please review if you have any suggestions. We can target for a SP of the PDT on Jan. 6th.
Thanks,
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report
this email' button
|
Hi Sigurd,
I agree that one figure could cover both EQM & UEQM cases. And the new figure better include “EQM/UEQM stream parser” (or simply “stream parser”, depending on the majority’s preference)
and “constellation mapper k”. The PDT UEQM-New MCS is meant to provide the text related to UEQM. So, it is fine to mention and focus on UEQM. The PDT Transmit Block Diagram should be the one to address your comment and combine the figures and descriptions.
Regards,
Alice
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi Alice,
The Constellation Mapper may be per stream, but that was already the case in the original figure. Even if different streams have different constellations, that doesn’t affect block
diagram.
Literally the only thing that has changed is a minor re-labelling of some of the blocks.
This is the figure from 802.11be:
This is the new Figure for UEQM:
As you can see, functionally (i.e. at the block level), these figures are identical.
We won’t have separate sections on “UEQM Stream Parser” vs. “EQM Stream Parser” in the spec. There will just be a section “Stream Parser” that covers both. Likewise for Constellation
Mapping. To keep consistency with the spec, one figure can cover both cases. A separate figure won’t add much value.
(Note: the only real difference is the # of spatial streams (NSS), but that hardly justifies a separate figure either)
Regards,
Sigurd
This email was sent from outside of MaxLinear.
@Rui Cao, I reviewed r3 and Sigurd’s comments instead
of r2. I’m fine with the changes.
@Sigurd Schelstraete
Regarding your comments to Figures 38-X1 and 38-X2, not only the “stream parser” is changed, the constellation mappers are also different from EHT because they depend on the stream
index.
Regarding your comment to the first paragraph in 38.3.10 “Why not use the same wording as in EHT?” UHR is different from EHT because MCS in the non-MU-MIMO case is jointly determined
by the MCS field, the UEQM indication and UEQM pattern. The last paragraph in 38.3.10 explains this.
WARNING:
This email originated from outside of Qualcomm. Please be wary of any links or attachments, and do not enable macros.
Hi Rui,
Please see attached for some edits and comments.
Regards,
Sigurd
This email was sent from outside of MaxLinear.
Hi All,
Some further editorial changes to align the subclause index with the Editor’s latest D0.1 skeleton document (11-24/1993r2). Please review.
Thanks,
Rui
Hi Ying,
Thank you very much for the detailed review.
I made corresponding changes to address your comments in the attached r2 version.
@qinghua.li@xxxxxxxxx,
@alicel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, please review if the changes to the transmit diagram figures’ title and UEQM pattern table format look ok to you.
Thanks,
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button
|
Hi Rui and All,
Attached please find my comments and some in-line editorial suggestions.
Thanks,
Ying
Thanks, Bo.
I incorporate the changes, updated the MCS in ELR PPDU, and made some additional editorial changes in the r1 version.
Thanks,
Rui
|
Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report this email' button
|
Hello, Rui,
Thanks very much for your consideration and the modified UHR-MCS part (38.3.8) looks good to me regarding the issue I raised.
I noticed UHR ER PPDU is missed in current text. Though the specific design for UHR ER PPDU is not clear yet, I suggest to add two sentences as in attachment to leave a hook for further
improvement.
I also made some minor editorial update for your reference and leave them to your decision.
Best Regards,
Bo
To unsubscribe from the STDS-802-11-TGBN list, click the following link: https://listserv.ieee.org/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=STDS-802-11-TGBN&A=1
|