On 21/01/14 17:00, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2014-01-21 at 12:09 +0100, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
>
>> + * @prob: probability of success of this birate
>
> typo: bitrate
>
>> +struct cfg80211_minstrel_rate_info {
>> + u32 bitrate;
>> + u32 prob;
>> +};
>
> Do you actually care about this, rather than bitrate*prob, ie. something
> like "expected throughput"?
Right now this is the way how we use it in the batman-adv code..but we
may decide to change it for some reason. This is why I preferred to keep
the two values separated.
> Actually this isn't expected throughput, but
> wouldn't something like expected throughput make even more sense?
How should I obtain that if not with the previous operation (bitrate*prob)?
--
Antonio Quartulli
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
