Michael Buesch <mb@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> I'm just wondering what's the right way(tm) to handle this. I see >> two options: >> >> 1. Consider the (possible) deadlock as a feature, document it and >> let the drivers handle it. This is relatively easy. >> >> 2. Handle this in mac80211 (eg. schedule a workqueue) and drivers >> don't need to care. This might complicate mac80211 implementation a >> bit, but easier for the drivers. >> >> I myself cannot decide which one is better. What do people think? >> > > I think drivers should not be able to call ieee80211_scan_completed() > directly. Instead they should call a function which schedules > ieee80211_scan_completed() on a workqueue. Yes, that was my option two. > In general I consider it broken behavior, if a function called by > the driver can recurse into the driver. We had that behavior in > ieee80211-softmac and it was one of the main reasons it sucked so > much. Ok, this is a very strong argument in favor of option 2. > The wq schedule code is trivial to implement in mac80211 and it's also > OK to do so. The function is not required to execute synchronously. I'm leaning on option two then. Thanks for the feedback! -- Kalle Valo -- 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
