On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Eliad Peller <eliad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 7, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> It doesn't make much sense to have a manually
>> managed chanctx refcount. It isn't performance
>> critical and it can't be even used outside the
>> protection of chanctx_mtx.
>>
>> With future enhancements to channel contenxt
>> (namely reservations) refcount accounting will
>> become more complex and having manually managed
>> refcount is going to be error-prone and confusing.
>>
>> The refcount is now equal to the number of vifs it
>> is assigned to. However in the future this will
>> change so keep the refcount/num_assigned_vifs
>> functions split now.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@xxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
> [...]
>
>> +int ieee80211_chanctx_num_assigned_vifs(struct ieee80211_chanctx *ctx)
>> +{
>> + struct ieee80211_local *local = ctx->local;
>> + struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata;
>> + int num = 0;
>> +
>> + lockdep_assert_held(&local->chanctx_mtx);
>> +
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> + list_for_each_entry_rcu(sdata, &local->interfaces, list)
>> + if (ieee80211_vif_assigned_chanctx(sdata) == ctx)
>> + num++;
>> + rcu_read_unlock();
>
> i don't think you need rcu_read_lock if you already hold chanctx_mtx
>
just realized this for the interface iteration, not for the chanctx.
please ignore :)
Eliad.
--
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
