Return-path: Received: from nbd.name ([46.4.11.11]:47004 "EHLO nbd.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752035Ab3B1DY6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Feb 2013 22:24:58 -0500 Message-ID: <512ECE01.8010102@openwrt.org> (sfid-20130228_042501_984760_39EEC6A5) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 04:24:49 +0100 From: Felix Fietkau MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd CC: "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Paul Stewart , Sujith Manoharan , linux-wireless Subject: Re: [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control References: <1360329197-72631-1-git-send-email-nbd@openwrt.org> <20757.1753.863278.858198@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <511508A6.8020104@openwrt.org> <51152D9E.1040106@openwrt.org> <20130227192030.GW12537@pogo> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2013-02-28 3:21 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Why don't we just move the ath9k rate control code to another mac80211 > rate control module, so it's available to other devices? > > It may not be a bad idea to keep it around as a reference and for > people to do comparisons against. It just seems silly to have a rate > control framework and then not use it.. I don't see the point in keeping that algorithm around. It has known design flaws that make it perform poorly in several scenarios, and fixing some of the flaws require basically rewriting it. - Felix