net80211 ratectl proof of concept
weongyo.jeong at gmail.com
Wed Apr 7 01:19:11 UTC 2010
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.
More information about the freebsd-net