Hi Andreas,
On Thu, Feb 25, 2016 at 11:08 AM, Andreas Fenkart <afenkart@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> releasing the scan_pending lock in mwifiex_check_next_scan_command
> is valid, since the lock is taken again, and all nodes removed
> from the scan_pending queue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andreas Fenkart <afenkart@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/cmdevt.c | 43 ++++++++++------------
> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/main.h | 1 +
> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/scan.c | 23 +++---------
> drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/sta_cmdresp.c | 13 +------
> 4 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/scan.c b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/scan.c
> index 6ddc98b..490d0d1 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/scan.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/scan.c
> @@ -1920,13 +1910,10 @@ static void mwifiex_check_next_scan_command(struct mwifiex_private *priv)
> }
> } else if ((priv->scan_aborting && !priv->scan_request) ||
> priv->scan_block) {
> - list_for_each_entry_safe(cmd_node, tmp_node,
> - &adapter->scan_pending_q, list) {
> - list_del(&cmd_node->list);
> - mwifiex_insert_cmd_to_free_q(adapter, cmd_node);
> - }
> spin_unlock_irqrestore(&adapter->scan_pending_q_lock, flags);
>
> + mwifiex_cancel_pending_scan_cmd(adapter);
> +
This is creating a "short" window where &adapter->scan_pending_q_lock
is unlocked here. Is that safe?
You might want to write mwifiex_cancel_pending_scan_cmd() as two
functions, one which takes the spinlock and calls the other and one
which does all the work so you can call the latter here without that
window where ..._q_lock is unlocked.
Thanks,
--
Julian Calaby
Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx
Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/
--
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
