On Mon, Apr 05, 2010 at 05:54:20PM +0100, Rui Paulo wrote: > > On 31 Mar 2010, at 14:05, Rui Paulo wrote: > > > Hi, > > I've started developing a ratectl framework for net80211, loosely > > based on what DragonFly has. Right now only one driver has been > > ported, but I would like your feedback before continuing. > > > > The objective is to, eventually, have all the ratectl stuff (amrr, > > sample, onoe(?) and rssadapt) in net80211 so all drivers can use it. > > We can also select which ratectl modules are built in the kernel > > config file. > > The framework support changing the current ratectl is out of scope > > for this patch. > > > > You can find the patch here: > > * http://people.freebsd.org/~rpaulo/ratectl.diff > > > > Only the ral driver and the AMRR rate control algorithms were ported. > > > > Some comments: > > o The rate control calls now dereferences several pointers and some > > inline functions are now real functions. I wonder how much this > > impacts performance and what we can do to solve it. > > > > o I wished there was a better way to do the IEEE80211_AMRR_SUCCESS / > > IEEE80211_AMRR_FAILURe call. > > > > o Some other stuff can also be `const' > > > > o I create ieee80211_ratect.[ch] to avoid polluting other files > > > > o I moved the AMRR parameters inside amrr_init() on purpose. The > > drivers we have now only specify a different interval and I plan to > > add export amrr_set_interval() via the ratectl framework later. > > > > > > I would like very much to see this in, unless there's a strong > > impending argument. > > I've ported all the drivers but I can't test them all. You can read > the patch at the same URL. > > I would like to commit this soon, though.
It looks it's what I really want to see. Please go forward. regards, Weongyo Jeong _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
