Return-path: Received: from mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net ([204.127.131.117]:46519 "EHLO mtiwmhc13.worldnet.att.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1762479AbXFGVWy (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Jun 2007 17:22:54 -0400 Message-ID: <4668772C.1000107@lwfinger.net> Date: Thu, 07 Jun 2007 16:22:52 -0500 From: Larry Finger MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jiri Benc CC: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: Add module parameter for setting initial rate in rc80211_simple References: <4661bc4f.88st9yXgySnzwVtb%Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> <20070607221939.444e9d74@griffin.suse.cz> In-Reply-To: <20070607221939.444e9d74@griffin.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Jiri Benc wrote: > > Don't misuse module parameters, please. If you have more devices, this > single parameter will affect all of them. That's not a good approach, > especially when the value you are trying to change can be changed on > the fly. --- snip --- > However, I'm not against setting the initial value to the lowest rate > available. As Johannes pointed out, if the rate control algorithm isn't > able to quickly migrate to higher rates, it's a good candidate for > rewrite. I'm more than a little confused. First you tell me that setting the initial rate with a module parameter is bad because it sets a value for all _MY_ devices, then you say that you will allow a change that would affect _EVERYONE'S_ devices. Huh? I wrote the code the way I did because I thought it was much better to allow a local solution rather than a global one. Larry