On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 11:32:44 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:

On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 20:45 -0400, John W. Linville wrote:

quoted

quoted

Just seemed a little strange, maybe it is perfectly fine.

iwl3945: Tunable channels: 13 802.11bg, 23 802.11a channels
PM: Adding info for No Bus:phy0
PM: Adding info for No Bus:wmaster0
wmaster0: Selected rate control algorithm 'iwl-3945-rs'

...but then we add an rt73usb...

PM: Adding info for No Bus:phy1
PM: Adding info for No Bus:wmaster1
wmaster1: Selected rate control algorithm 'iwl-3945-rs' <----
PM: Adding info for No Bus:wlan1
usbcore: registered new interface driver rt73usb

Weird. But I guess that's because iwl-3945-rs is loaded and available so
it's chosen first or something.

Exactly. This is one of things that should be solved in the patch
mentioned below.

quoted

This looks like the reverse of a dust-up we had a couple of months ago:

	http://marc.info/?l=linux-wireless&m=117875332512693&w=2

It is possible to change the rate control algorithm now via debugfs.
In the past someone proposed letting drivers request their default
rate scaling algorithm, and I think that makes a lot of sense.
Any thoughts?

Still waiting for a patch from Intel.

Apply the patch already? IIRC James made a pretty good one around that
time to let the driver choose a default name as part of the hw structure
it registers and it can be NULL for the default.

Of course, in a perfect world we'd have a 'default' rate control setting
somewhere and apply that for drivers that have rate_control==NULL, while
default would default to 'simple' to avoid the issue above.

I'd really like to see that in the patch. Seems to be a real issue.

 Jiri

-- 
Jiri Benc
SUSE Labs