On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Lukáš Turek <8an@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 18.2.2010 03:13 Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> coverage = (distance + 449) / 450;
>> coverage/450 = distance + 499
>> (coverage/450) - 499 = distance
>
> Inverting the formula like this doesn't make much sense...
>
> The addition of 449 is there to round the resulting number up, because the
> coverage class limits maximum distance and if it was rounded down as normal
> integer division does, the resulting ACK timeout would be too low.
>
> However, if you subtract 449 in the inverted formula, you get something like a
> minimum distance for the coverage class - which doesn't mean anything,
> because higher ACK timeout and slot time works for smaller distances too.
> Maximum distance is what's interesting to the user. So the correct
> calculation is just multiplying the coverage class by 450 as I'm doing in
> print_phy_handler():
>
> printf("\tCoverage class: %d (up to %dm)\n", coverage, 450 * coverage);
Thanks I'll fix and resend.
Luis
--
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
