Return-path: Received: from nbd.name ([46.4.11.11]:41129 "EHLO nbd.name" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751332Ab3B1NJi (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2013 08:09:38 -0500 Message-ID: <512F5709.60907@openwrt.org> (sfid-20130228_140943_954900_67EE0CBB) Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:09:29 +0100 From: Felix Fietkau MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Bob Copeland CC: Adrian Chadd , "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> <512ECE01.8010102@openwrt.org> <20130228114724.GB16369@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20130228114724.GB16369@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2013-02-28 12:47 PM, Bob Copeland wrote: > 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... I agree, we should remove that one as well. - Felix