On 05/10/2013 02:26 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Fri, 2013-05-10 at 14:22 +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
On 05/10/2013 02:08 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
Using separate locks in cfg80211 and mac80211 has always
caused issues, for example having to unlock in places in
mac80211 to call cfg80211, which even needed a framework
to make cfg80211 calls after some functions returned etc.
Additionally, I suspect some issues people have reported
with the cfg80211 state getting confused could be due to
such issues, when cfg80211 is asking mac80211 to change
state but mac80211 is in the process of telling cfg80211
that the state changed (in another way.)
I guess this change affects fullmac drivers like brcmfmac, right?
I don't think so.
I am asking because I noticed the following documentation change:
- * @mtx: mutex used to lock data in this struct
+ * @mtx: mutex used to lock data in this struct, may be used by drivers
+ * and some API functions require it held
I did not look at the individual API functions, but I guess to be sure I
should check whether we are using any of them.
Gr. AvS
--
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
