On Mon, 2007-12-10 at 00:31 +0100, Stefano Brivio wrote: > On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 23:29:21 +0100 > Mattias Nissler <mattias.nissler@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > Note that current rate_control_pid_sample() is only called from > > rate_control_pid_tx_status(), which does an tx_num_xmit++ in advance. So > > the tx_num_xmit branch should actually never be executed (I kept it only > > to guard against any division by zero errors). > > Eek? Removing the misleading comment would have been nice... Indeed. I'll amend it :-) > where does > interpolation occur now? I got a bit confused by this. There is no interpolation so far :-) Rate control isn't called periodically, but only when tx status reports come in. Therefore, currently we have fixed interval sampling only when packets are sent at a high enough rate, i.e. 1 packet per second. I'd like to keep it that way, so we save the timer and don't have to worry about synchronization. I guess you rather want to base your sharpening patch on the jiffies - last_sample difference. If it's to much, there haven't been many packets recently. This will also work when rate control is started, cause last_sample == 0 then. Mattias - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
