On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 8:47 AM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > > Many places that currently check that cfg80211_mutex > is held don't actually use any data protected by it. > The functions that need to hold the cfg80211_mutex > are the ones using the cfg80211_regdomain variable, > so add the lock assertion to those and clarify this > in the comments. > > The reason for this is that nl80211 uses the regdom > without being able to hold reg_mutex. Hm, do we want to do this or add a caller to reg.c that gets nl80211 to copy over the current regdomain over for it to parse and then send? In that case we'd only need the cfg80211_mutex for update_all_wiphy_regulatory(). Thoughts? Luis -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
