On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 07:20:11AM -0800, Luis Rodriguez wrote: > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 06:50:34AM -0800, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-01-28 at 06:44 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 02:17:21AM -0800, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > On Tue, 2009-01-27 at 18:52 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > > > > > > > > > + mutex_lock(&cfg80211_drv_mutex); > > > > > + regd = reg_get_current_rd(); > > > > > + mutex_unlock(&cfg80211_drv_mutex); > > > > > + > > > > > + if (!regd) > > > > > + goto out; > > > > > > > > Any reason you need to copy and can't just build the whole thing under > > > > lock? > > > > > > Glad you asked, we can lock the entire call or we can do the above to > > > copy. I picked a copy to not let a regular user (get reg can be called > > > by anyone) abuse the lock as cfg80211_drv_mutex is used in a lot of places, > > > I guess its silly but other's input on this is appreciated as well. Not sure > > > if the copy was the best choice. > > > > I don't really see much difference between locking to create a copy and > > locking to create a copy in a different format, do you? > > Except to create > > a copy needs to allocate memory which could take even longer. > > Agreed, that's the thing I was not thinking about those two paths I was > thinking of either using a copy of cfg80211_regdomain for nl80211.c to move > forward without having to keep cfg80211_drv_mutex *or* having > reg_get_current_rd() just return cfg80211_regdomain and have the reg_reg > lock during its entire access. > > I am honestly not sure which is the best approach but I picked a copy > since I figure having a user do a kmalloc() is less harmless then contending > the lock more time if he wanted to abuse the system. I also thought about > using a static regd in place just to copy the cfg80211_regdomain but then > that would mean having a large static regd with max num rules and I didn't > like that either. Seemed to me a kmalloc() was in the middle. Let me know > if you guys have better advice. Actually nevermind, I see your point now, we would be iterating over cfg80211_regdomain anyway, will resend, thanks. Luis -- 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
