Hi Doug/Brian > -----Original Message----- > From: dianders@xxxxxxxxxx [mailto:dianders@xxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of > Doug Anderson > Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 2:45 AM > To: Ganapathi Bhat > Cc: Brian Norris; linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Cathy Luo; Xinming Hu; > Zhiyuan Yang; James Cao; Mangesh Malusare; Karthik Doddayennegere > Ananthapadmanabha > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 1/3] mwifiex: cleanup rx_pkt_lock usage in > 11n_rxreorder.c > > Hi, > > On Tue, Nov 7, 2017 at 8:25 AM, Ganapathi Bhat <gbhat@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote: > > Hi Doug/Brian, > > > > Thanks a lot for the comments and the discussion. First of all we will abort > the change added by this patch as we don't need rx_pkt_lock acquired to > protect the deleted item. Next, we will prepare below changes to address > the concerns discussed: > > 1. Move rx_pkt_lock from mwifiex_private to rx_reorder_tbl > > ...or, possibly, remove rx_pkt_lock completely. See my other response... After checking the flow, I am thinking of removing below 3 spin locks: rx_reorder_tbl_lock rx_pkt_lock tx_ba_stream_tbl_lock As you both have pointed earlier, they used by main thread and occasionally by cfg80211 (for TDLS configuration). Can you please comment on this change? Is it OK to ignore cfg80211 here. > > -Doug Regards, Ganapathi
