From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
To: Bob Copeland <me@bobcopeland.com>
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com>,
Paul Stewart <pstew@google.com>,
Sujith Manoharan <sujith@msujith.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control
Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2013 14:09:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <512F5709.60907@openwrt.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130228114724.GB16369@localhost>
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
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-02-28 13:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-02-08 13:13 [RFC] ath9k: remove ath9k_rate_control Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 13:30 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:04 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 14:06 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:08 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-08 14:16 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-08 16:38 ` Paul Stewart
2013-02-08 16:53 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-27 19:20 ` Luis R. Rodriguez
2013-02-28 2:21 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-02-28 3:24 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-28 3:54 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-28 4:32 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-02-28 5:08 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 14:31 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 15:35 ` Ben Greear
2013-03-01 21:23 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 21:28 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-02 2:19 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-02 5:40 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-02 8:26 ` Georgiewskiy Yuriy
2013-03-02 20:23 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-03 3:58 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-02-28 11:47 ` Bob Copeland
2013-02-28 13:09 ` Felix Fietkau [this message]
2013-02-28 18:53 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-02-28 19:07 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 1:23 ` Sujith Manoharan
2013-03-01 10:09 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 3:53 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 10:14 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 10:22 ` Adrian Chadd
2013-03-01 10:29 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 11:18 ` Mohammed Shafi
2013-03-01 11:31 ` Felix Fietkau
2013-03-01 12:32 ` Mohammed Shafi
2013-03-01 13:05 ` Felix Fietkau
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=512F5709.60907@openwrt.org \
--to=nbd@openwrt.org \
--cc=adrian@freebsd.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=me@bobcopeland.com \
--cc=pstew@google.com \
--cc=rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com \
--cc=sujith@msujith.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).