On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 09:29:36PM +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Sunday, August 17, 2014 01:48:07 PM Andreea-Cristina Bernat wrote: > > The rcu_dereference() call is used directly in a condition. > > Since its return value is never dereferenced it is recommended to use > > "rcu_access_pointer()" instead of "rcu_dereference()". > > Therefore, this patch makes the replacement. > > [...] > > Signed-off-by: Andreea-Cristina Bernat <bernat.ada@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/main.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/main.c > > index f8ded84..12018ff 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/main.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/carl9170/main.c > > @@ -1431,7 +1431,7 @@ static int carl9170_op_ampdu_action(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, > > return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > rcu_read_lock(); > > - if (rcu_dereference(sta_info->agg[tid])) { > > + if (rcu_access_pointer(sta_info->agg[tid])) { > > rcu_read_unlock(); > > return -EBUSY; > > } > > There's more. The check does not do a whole lot. I think *it* [the check] and the > rcu_read_[un]lock [and the return -EBUSY] can be removed completely from the > IEEE80211_AMPDU_TX_START code-path in carl9170_op_ampdu_action. > > It would be awesome, if you could you make a patch which removes this > unneeded cosmic-ray-protection check :-) . Could you tell me why you think that those lines have to be removed? I would like to fully understand this before I remove them. Thank you, Andreea > > Thanks > Christian -- 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