On Thu, 2008-07-31 at 21:14 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 4:05 PM, Johannes Berg > <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-07-30 at 19:08 +0300, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > > >> > Can you explain how starvation happens? In what scenarios? With or > >> > without aggregation? > >> > >> for (queue = 0; queue < QD_NUM(hw); queue++) > >> > >> This always starts 0 prioritize dequeue the first frame. But what we > >> need is RR and let HW to prioritize the transmission according AC > > > > That's from the old code not having real MQ though, right? I'm totally > > not concerned about that. > > Correct. The bottom line is that correct behavior MQ would be shift > scheduling decision to the HW. Right. Which brings us back to the original point, why does the hw need to make the scheduling decision between agg and non-agg? johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
