On Sat, 2008-10-11 at 02:49 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote: > On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 2:43 AM, Johannes Berg > <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-10-11 at 02:32 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 1:51 AM, Johannes Berg > >> <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > Move bss_conf into the vif struct so that drivers can > >> > access it during ->tx without having to store it in > >> > the private data or similar. No driver updates because > >> > this is only for when they want to start using it. > >> > >> What protection should driver take to be sure it won't be changed underneath ? > >> With prive copy you know this is changed only in bss_info changed is called. > > > > Yeah, that's true, I guess you can only access those fields there that > > you can access atomically. That's actually most of the fields though. > > > > Also, we don't actually take care about locking this structure at all > > even in mac80211, something we might need to think about. > > When working on SM PS I have the same dilemma I have with > ieee80211_conf do you think I need to take a private copy of it? Well, what do you use it for? If you absolutely rely on it having the same value, then you probably need to do that, but if you just use it then I don't see why you'd have to, unless it's some value that can't be read atomically. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
