On Thu, 2014-05-22 at 15:28 +0200, Michal Kazior wrote: > vif->csa_active is protected by mutexes only. This > means it is unreliable to depend on it on codeflow > in non-sleepable beacon and CSA code. There was no > guarantee to have vif->csa_active update be > visible before beacons are updated on SMP systems. > > Using csa counter offsets which are embedded in > beacon struct (and thus are protected with single > RCU assignment) is much safer. This seems reasonable, but many uses of csa_active remain, no? hwsim for example seems to access it without locking as well. johannes -- 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
