On 2010-06-28 12:20 PM, Björn Smedman wrote: > 2010/6/28 Felix Fietkau <nbd@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >> On 2010-06-28 2:01 AM, Björn Smedman wrote: > [snip] >>> I guess the real solution is your rewrite... But in the mean time >>> perhaps we can memcpy the tx_info control from the last subframe to >>> the first before calling ath_buf_set_rate() in ath_tx_sched_aggr()? >>> Could that have any side effects? It could make the aggregate size go >>> over the 4 ms limit I guess... How bad is that? >> There's an easy solution which would take into account the 4ms frame >> limit properly, and which could work without any memcpy() hacks: >> >> I could just grab a pointer to the last buffer in the tid queue in the >> ath_tx_sched_aggr() function, then pass it to ath_lookup_rate() via >> ath_tx_form_aggr(), and also to ath_buf_set_rate(). Then I make those >> functions use this last buffer as reference for the rate lookup. > > Sounds better to use the rate control from the last buffer in the tid > queue. But be careful if you don't memcpy it to the first frame of the > aggregate then the feedback calculated in ath_tx_rc_status() after tx > will be incorrect again, no? Right. I intend to let ath_buf_set_rate() set the rates array of the first subframe accordingly. - Felix -- 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
