From: Eyal Shapira <[email protected]>

success_ratio is actually 128 * SR in percentage while
IWL_MVM_RS_SR_NO_DECREASE is 85%. Fix this by using RS_PERCENT().
This bug caused the if branch to be always executed. This in turn
led to always selecting a rate, following a column switch, in which
the expected throughput would exceed the best expected current throughput.
In some scenarios where the success ratio isn't >85% such a rate
could be too aggressive leading us to avoid the new column.
This has the potential of causing sub optimal performance.

Reported-by: Moshe Harel <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Eyal Shapira <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <[email protected]>
---
 drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/mvm/rs.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/mvm/rs.c 
b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/mvm/rs.c
index 2bf2a08..435e1e4 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/mvm/rs.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/mvm/rs.c
@@ -1527,7 +1527,7 @@ static s32 rs_get_best_rate(struct iwl_mvm *mvm,
        u32 target_tpt;
        int rate_idx;
 
-       if (success_ratio > IWL_MVM_RS_SR_NO_DECREASE) {
+       if (success_ratio >= RS_PERCENT(IWL_MVM_RS_SR_NO_DECREASE)) {
                target_tpt = 100 * expected_current_tpt;
                IWL_DEBUG_RATE(mvm,
                               "SR %d high. Find rate exceeding 
EXPECTED_CURRENT %d\n",
@@ -1535,7 +1535,7 @@ static s32 rs_get_best_rate(struct iwl_mvm *mvm,
        } else {
                target_tpt = lq_sta->last_tpt;
                IWL_DEBUG_RATE(mvm,
-                              "SR %d not thag good. Find rate exceeding 
ACTUAL_TPT %d\n",
+                              "SR %d not that good. Find rate exceeding 
ACTUAL_TPT %d\n",
                               success_ratio, target_tpt);
        }
 
-- 
2.5.3

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to