Re: ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr
From: Sam Leffler (sam_at_errno.com)
Date: 03/09/05
- Previous message: Eric Kjeldergaard: "a relatively major problem with ext2."
- In reply to: Marcin Jessa: "ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Next in thread: Sam Leffler: "Re: ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Reply: Sam Leffler: "Re: ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2005 19:08:26 -0800 To: Marcin Jessa <lists@yazzy.org>
Marcin Jessa wrote:
> Hi.
>
> What are the exact functions of ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr ? How do they differ?
>
> UPDATING says just a little:
>
> 20041201:
> The ath driver has been updated to split the tx rate control
> algorithm into a separate module. You need to include either
> ath_rate_onoe or ath_rate_amrr when configuring the kernel.
>
>
>
The api is defined in sys/dev/ath/if_athrate.h. Since this api is
internal to the ath driver I've not done a manual page.
As to the difference between the modules, ath_rate_onoe is the algorithm
that's been used forever. ath_rate_amrr is an alternative algorithm
that is purported to be better. It so happens that Josh Bicket has just
come out with a new rate control algorithm that looks to be an
improvement over both and as soon as we resolve some issues I intend to
commit it to -current for folks to try instead of the onoe algorithm.
If it pans out we'll make it the default.
Sam
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: Eric Kjeldergaard: "a relatively major problem with ext2."
- In reply to: Marcin Jessa: "ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Next in thread: Sam Leffler: "Re: ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Reply: Sam Leffler: "Re: ath_rate_onoe and ath_rate_amrr"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
