Hey,
I'm a little late on this and away from my development machine anyway, but when reading my email, I noticed the following and thought this is important enough to point out, even though I only have that crappy webmailer and the only kernel tree I can look at is wireless-2.6/everything on git.kernel.org
In rc80211_pid.h, you have the following (this from the wireless-2.6 tree):
/* Sampling period for measuring percentage of failed frames. */
#define RC_PID_INTERVAL (HZ / 8)
But rc80211_pid_algo.c says:
period = (HZ * pinfo->sampling_period + 500) / 1000;
if (!period)
period = 1;
You see this is completely bogus. My original patch had:
/* Sampling period for measuring percentage of failed frames in 0.001s. */
#define RC_PID_INTERVAL 1000
You see why what you posted and John commited is bogus?
I'm getting a little fed up with this, you keep screwing up the code with my name on it *sigh*
And again, I still don't think guarding against period == 0 is the right thing to do. As I explained privately in IRC, we should make sure the sample_interval is larger than HZ when setting the sample_interval variable (once nl80211 is done). It doesn't make sense to do this check every time we execute the code when we can do it once in advance.
Sigh.
Mattias
--
Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
-
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
