diff options
| author | Abhijeet Kolekar <abhijeet.kolekar@intel.com> | 2009-03-18 05:51:51 +0100 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> | 2009-03-28 01:12:59 +0100 |
| commit | 82127493a656f6293ffb1566410b5753f29991ef (patch) | |
| tree | cde8849fa0a0a2da082f28cfec65fbd324a7842f | |
| parent | iwl3945: fix checkpatch.pl errors (diff) | |
| download | linux-82127493a656f6293ffb1566410b5753f29991ef.tar.xz linux-82127493a656f6293ffb1566410b5753f29991ef.zip | |
iwl3945: control rate decrease
Control the rate decrease. Do not decrease the rate fast.
Use success_ratio for rate scaling :)
Signed-off-by: Abhijeet Kolekar <abhijeet.kolekar@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
| -rw-r--r-- | drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945-rs.c | 13 |
1 files changed, 6 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945-rs.c b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945-rs.c index f65c308a6714..af6b9d444778 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945-rs.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-3945-rs.c @@ -124,7 +124,7 @@ static struct iwl3945_tpt_entry iwl3945_tpt_table_g[] = { #define IWL39_RATE_HIGH_TH 11520 #define IWL_SUCCESS_UP_TH 8960 #define IWL_SUCCESS_DOWN_TH 10880 -#define IWL_RATE_MIN_FAILURE_TH 8 +#define IWL_RATE_MIN_FAILURE_TH 6 #define IWL_RATE_MIN_SUCCESS_TH 8 #define IWL_RATE_DECREASE_TH 1920 #define IWL_RATE_RETRY_TH 15 @@ -488,7 +488,7 @@ static void rs_tx_status(void *priv_rate, struct ieee80211_supported_band *sband IWL_DEBUG_RATE(priv, "enter\n"); - retries = info->status.rates[0].count - 1; + retries = info->status.rates[0].count; /* Sanity Check for retries */ if (retries > IWL_RATE_RETRY_TH) retries = IWL_RATE_RETRY_TH; @@ -791,16 +791,15 @@ static void rs_get_rate(void *priv_r, struct ieee80211_sta *sta, if ((window->success_ratio < IWL_RATE_DECREASE_TH) || !current_tpt) { IWL_DEBUG_RATE(priv, "decrease rate because of low success_ratio\n"); scale_action = -1; - /* No throughput measured yet for adjacent rates, * try increase */ } else if ((low_tpt == IWL_INVALID_VALUE) && (high_tpt == IWL_INVALID_VALUE)) { - if (high != IWL_RATE_INVALID && window->success_counter >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) + if (high != IWL_RATE_INVALID && window->success_ratio >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) scale_action = 1; else if (low != IWL_RATE_INVALID) - scale_action = -1; + scale_action = 0; /* Both adjacent throughputs are measured, but neither one has * better throughput; we're using the best rate, don't change @@ -826,14 +825,14 @@ static void rs_get_rate(void *priv_r, struct ieee80211_sta *sta, else { IWL_DEBUG_RATE(priv, "decrease rate because of high tpt\n"); - scale_action = -1; + scale_action = 0; } } else if (low_tpt != IWL_INVALID_VALUE) { if (low_tpt > current_tpt) { IWL_DEBUG_RATE(priv, "decrease rate because of low tpt\n"); scale_action = -1; - } else if (window->success_counter >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) { + } else if (window->success_ratio >= IWL_RATE_INCREASE_TH) { /* Lower rate has better * throughput,decrease rate */ scale_action = 1; |