Return-path: Received: from mail-ia0-f175.google.com ([209.85.210.175]:57599 "EHLO mail-ia0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751779Ab3B1Lr1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2013 06:47:27 -0500 Received: by mail-ia0-f175.google.com with SMTP id r4so1397585iaj.20 for ; Thu, 28 Feb 2013 03:47:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 06:47:24 -0500 From: Bob Copeland To: Felix Fietkau Cc: Adrian Chadd , "Luis R. Rodriguez" , Paul Stewart , Sujith Manoharan , linux-wireless Subject: Re: [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control Message-ID: <20130228114724.GB16369@localhost> (sfid-20130228_124731_811500_02A5A386) 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> <512ECE01.8010102@openwrt.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <512ECE01.8010102@openwrt.org> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, Feb 28, 2013 at 04:24:49AM +0100, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2013-02-28 3:21 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > 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. The same could be said of PID... -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com