Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 15:01:29 -0700 From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> To: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com> Cc: freebsd-mobile@freebsd.org Subject: Re: kernel: ath0: device timeout Message-ID: <445290B9.5050807@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.1.20060428141609.01d4a828@live555.com> References: <7.0.1.0.1.20060428141609.01d4a828@live555.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Ross Finlayson wrote: > >> If changing the tx rate control algorithm really fixes it then that >> says sample may be handing back bogus rate codes. Since I can't make >> this happen someone else needs to dig. >> >> As to better performance, onoe is not especially good and I do not >> recommend it. However sample is too aggressive on up-shifting the tx >> rate and tends to vary the rate too quickly so can degrade performance >> when signal deteriorates. I have done extensive testing of all the >> rate control algorithms as well as a proprietary one and chose sample >> as the default. > > Excuse the naive question, but if I were to try using a different rate > control algorithm than the default one, then how specifically would I go > about doing so? Currently I just do > > kldload -v if_ath > > Should I also (or instead?) run > kldload -v ath_rate_onoe > or something?? > > Ideally, I'd prefer not to have to change the default algorithm, but > something with the current "ath" driver is just not working well for me. ath_rate.ko is the target built by any of ath_rate_sample, ath_rate_onoe, and ath_rate_amrr so if you're using modules you build+install whichever is appropriate and then kldload if_ath. If you've got stuff compiled into the kernel then specify the appropriate device. Sam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?445290B9.5050807>