On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 10:27:48AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-02-20 at 10:21 +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 09:52:45AM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > > +
> > > + /* sync with ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup */
> > > + spin_lock(&sta->ps_lock);
> > > + /*
> > > + * STA woke up the meantime and all the frames on ps_tx_buf have
> > > + * been queued to pending queue. No reordering can happen, go
> > > + * ahead and Tx the packet.
> > > + */
> > > + if (!test_sta_flag(sta, WLAN_STA_PS_STA)) {
> > > + spin_unlock(&sta->ps_lock);
> >
> > Actually I'm not sure if we should check if both WLAN_STA_PS_DRIVER
> > and WLAN_STA_PS_STA flags are clear ?
>
> This area is a bit confusing, but I don't think WLAN_STA_PS_STA will be
> clear until after WLAN_STA_PS_DRIVER is?
Hmm, actually looks like we call ps_deliver_wakeup() with WLAN_STA_PS_STA
flag currently cleared.
tatic void sta_unblock(struct work_struct *wk)
{
if (!test_sta_flag(sta, WLAN_STA_PS_STA)) {
local_bh_disable();
ieee80211_sta_ps_deliver_wakeup(sta);
local_bh_enable();
so on TX we should rather check WLAN_STA_PS_DRIVER flag .
Stanislaw
--
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
