Ben Greear wrote: > If you will just delete that code above, then you can compile in both ath9k > and minstrel rate controls and select at run-time by twiddling the mac80211 > rate control module option. I am not sure if a user is going to change the rate control at run-time by reloading mac80211 and what would be point in using ath9k RC which has basic connectivity problems ? > Last I tested there were still advantages to ath9k rate control in our environment, > (including when running through an attenuator and over-the-air), > so I think it should be left in to keep minstrel honest if nothing else. ath9k RC shows slightly higher throughput numbers in an _ideal_ environment, but that is hardly the case in real-world usage. I agree that the code can be left in the driver, it will be useful for comparison with minstrel. Sujith -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html