On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 18:25 +0200, ext Dan Carpenter wrote:
> We should start the loop consistently with the "wl_lock" lock held.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_main.c
> index 3e4b9fb..b61cd10 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/wl12xx/wl1271_main.c
> @@ -466,6 +466,7 @@ static void wl1271_irq_work(struct work_struct *work)
> intr = le32_to_cpu(wl->fw_status->intr);
> if (!intr) {
> wl1271_debug(DEBUG_IRQ, "Zero interrupt received.");
> + spin_lock_irqsave(&wl->wl_lock, flags);
> continue;
> }
>
Good catch. Thank you.
Acked-by: Luciano Coelho <luciano.coelho@xxxxxxxxx>
--
Cheers,
Luca.
--
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
