Re: [PATCH 24/25]: Macro for moving average

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 4/2/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Quoting Ian McDonald:
|  > +/**
|  > + * Macro for exponentially weighted moving average
|  > + * @weight: Weight to be used as damping factor, in units of 1/10
|  > + * Beware that @val is evaluated multiple times.
|  > + */
|  > +#define TFRC_EWMA(val, newval, weight) \
|  > + val = val? ((weight) * val + (10 - (weight)) * (newval)) / 10 : (newval)
|  > +
|  Just wondering why you pass weight when you only use 9 anyway and it
|  just adds a step. Is it used in following patches with a different
|  weight?
|
In the following patches it is used one more time, which is for the `Preventing
Oscillations' changeset (this is not in the next patch set but in the one after that);
here again the weight 9/10 is used. I think it is useful to keep the `weight' argument,
since RFC 3448 suggests to use a different weight for the RTT sample when the `Oscillation
Prevention' e.g. is not deployed (a q close to zero).
I think it is better to keep the weight argument, it allows changing the code later, while
still providing the abstraction: for CCID 3 there are 4 uses of this macro alone.

OK.

Acked-by: Ian McDonald <ian.mcdonald@xxxxxxxxxxx>

--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/
Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
WAND Network Research Group
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [IETF DCCP]     [Linux Networking]     [Git]     [Security]     [Linux Assembly]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux