On Thu, 2021-10-28 at 10:25 +0000, Jean-Pierre TOSONI wrote: > + spin_lock_bh(&rx->sta->ampdu_mlme.rx_offl_lock); > if (!test_bit(tid, rx->sta->ampdu_mlme.agg_session_valid) && > - !test_and_set_bit(tid, rx->sta->ampdu_mlme.unexpected_agg)) > + /* back_req is allowed if the fw just received addba */ > If we're going to add an unconditional lock here, I see little reason to have all the test_bit()/test_and_set_bit() etc. I really don't think it's _right_ to add an unconditional lock here though, if it can at all be avoided. johannes
