On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 10:16 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 5:07 PM, Tomas Winkler <tomasw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:25 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez >> <lrodriguez@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> A quick test indicates it works but the removal is still an issue. >> >> I didn't implement it yet I just wanted a feedback if I'm in correct >> direction with the starting part. > > Seems reasonable so far, my concern so far was just the introduction > of a new spinlock for the ba_session list, but I can't see yet a > better way. > > At this point I've given up hope of this getting merged but I do think > distributions using 2.6.27 will want this anyway so we might as well > finish the job and maintain it ourselves should it not get merged. > What do you think? > >> yes ieee80211_init_agg() > > Thanks, I'm using this now. > >>> I don't think it was locking before under the code which is now >>> under initiate_aggr_and_timer() though. >> >> Correct you cannot lock this part it leads to soft lock. > > Oh ok v3 had this order. > > Luis > I'm proposing to drop this implementation at all and focus on correct solution , this is just too messy. Maybe develop it over 2.6.27 so it will be maybe merge to stable release as well. Tomas -- 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
