On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 01:48 -0800, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > Are you sure the mutex order reg_mutex --> cfg80211_mutex is a good
> > idea? Is there a need for two locks at all?
>
> I think so. So reg_mutex would prevent any new requests to be added
> into the queue, that's the only thing that mutex protects. Once you
> are sure you have no one adding requests to the queue you then need to
> ensure no one is processing a regulatory request and hence the
> cfg80211_mutex.
>
> We need to protect the queue from additions to the queue from having
> the workqueue process it.
Maybe just use a spinlock for the list, and do the loop manually like in
mac80211/key.c then?
spin_lock(&todo_lock);
while (!list_empty(&todo_list)) {
key = list_first_entry(&todo_list, struct ieee80211_key, todo);
list_del_init(&key->todo);
spin_unlock(&todo_lock);
........
spin_lock(&todo_lock);
}
spin_unlock(&todo_lock);
johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
