Return-path: Received: from mfe1.polimi.it ([131.175.12.23]:39901 "EHLO polimi.it" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752901AbXLLAOR (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Dec 2007 19:14:17 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:10:21 +0100 From: Stefano Brivio To: Mattias Nissler Cc: linux-wireless Subject: Re: [WIP][PATCH] rc80211_pid: Send events to userspace for debugging Message-ID: <20071212011021.4d058b55@morte> (sfid-20071212_001419_730199_4879D09A) In-Reply-To: <1197418044.7030.32.camel@localhost> References: <1197414686.7030.27.camel@localhost> <1197418044.7030.32.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 12 Dec 2007 01:07:24 +0100 Mattias Nissler wrote: > I guess from the second graph we can see that the integration interval > is too large. I think I should try increasing the proportional > coefficient and decrease the integral coefficient. What do you think? > Control theory people please speak up :-) Which parameters have been used here? What's the scenario? Any changes in environment while testing? It looks like there are a lot of small integral wind-up phenomena. You should maybe just decrease the integral coefficient and don't vary the other parameters, and see what happens. But again, I would need to know environmental conditions. If your driver reports SNR, e.g., it may make sense to report it on the graph. -- Ciao Stefano