On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 12:09 +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> struct rate_control_ops {
> struct module *module;
> const char *name;
> @@ -4478,6 +4489,10 @@ struct rate_control_ops {
> void (*add_sta_debugfs)(void *priv, void *priv_sta,
> struct dentry *dir);
> void (*remove_sta_debugfs)(void *priv, void *priv_sta);
> +
> + void (*get_minstrel_best_rate)
> + (void *priv, void *priv_sta,
> + struct ieee80211_minstrel_rate_info *info);
> };
This, I think, is a terrible idea. Never mind the coding style (which
too looks terrible imho), but this also bloats the struct for a single
rate control algorithm's use only.
I'd be much happier if you actually declared this to be something like
"expected throughput" and did some calculations and made it generic.
johannes
--
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
