On Sat, Mar 02, 2013 at 12:01:59PM +0100, Thomas Hühn wrote: > Hi Bob, > > I should have removed the debugging, thx for finding, I will fix this in v2. Thanks! > If I understand you right, your idea is to avoid equal rates for > max_throughput and max_probability. The patch above would use equal > rates for max_thr & max_prob. if the channel conditions allow this, so > if they are pretty good. In other cases the max. probability rate can > be totally different from max_thr. rate. So I do not understand the > reasoning behind enforcing different rates for max_tp and max_prob. > Minstrel will just apply its rule of max_prob_rate regardless if this > rate also provides best or second best or other throughput values. I guess my reasoning is that if you have an MRR setup like this: mrr0 rate = 24, count = 8 (max_tp) mrr1 rate = 18, count = 3 (max_tp2) mrr2 rate = 24, count = 8 (max_prob) mrr3 rate = 6, count = 3 ...and you are located right next to the microwave that just got turned on :) ... then that second set of 24 mbit retries may well be quite some time of wasted airtime vs perhaps picking 12 mbit if the probability of those rates is close. [this was an actual table generated by minstrel from my simulation, at least at the time, max retries was ignored by minstrel.] > Would you mind to this this patch with your hwsim ? That is a bit complicated :) To do so requires porting my userspace wifi simulator to wmediumd, a process I have started but haven't put much time into. Nevertheless it has been on my personal to-do for quite some time, so I'll give it a go soon. I wouldn't hold up acceptance of the patches for my testing though. -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com -- 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
