> I think that rc80211-simple is broken. A user may just want not to have a > real rate control algorithm (i.e. no need for rates above the lowest one or > certainty of perfect signal). Currently, that user would choose > rc80211-simple, I guess, and well, this is almost fine, as he could > manually set a rate. But let's say it's an embedded device, and small > footprint is a must. Why would he need to use any RC algorithm (even other > than rc80211-simple, as your Kconfig changes allow for this) then? mac80211 > currently fails if no RC algorithms are available. So, I'd say, let's fix > mac80211, so that it can work without any RC algorithm. And the default in > this case could just be to set the lowest rate. That's what I called a > dummy RC algorithm. Well, even an embedded device needs a rate control algorithm. Me allowing to build none into mac80211 is mainly for when you want to ship your device with intel wireless hardware and that has an algorithm you *know* will be used *anyway*. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
