Hi Johannes, > -----Original Message----- > From: Johannes Berg [mailto:johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Monday, October 03, 2011 11:30 PM > To: Bing Zhao > Cc: linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; John W. Linville; Amitkumar Karwar; Kiran Divekar; Yogesh Powar; > Frank Huang > Subject: Re: [PATCH] mwifiex: use separate wait queue for each command node > > On Mon, 2011-10-03 at 21:08 -0700, Bing Zhao wrote: > > From: Amitkumar Karwar <akarwar@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Currently global wait queue (adapter->cmd_wait_q) is used for > > sending synchronous commands to FW. When two threads enter in > > mwifiex_send_cmd_sync() routine at the same time, both the > > threads wait for their command responses. They wake up > > simultaneously after getting response of 1st command. After > > this when a thread is waiting for command response of 3rd > > command, it wakes up after getting response of 2nd command > > and so on. Therefore we don't wait for the response of last > > command(0xaa) during unload. Hence while next time loading the > > driver command time out is seen for INIT command. > > > > This problem is resolved by having separate wait queue for each > > command. Since driver sends multiple scan commands asynchronously > > to FW for scanning the network, we will need separate wait queue > > for the whole scan operation. Earlier the global wait queue was > > being used for scan. > > I can't say I really care about this, but this seems completely > pointless. A waitqueue doesn't imply that just a single thing can be > waiting on it, since you should be using wait_for() macros. Thus, all > you *really* need is a bit in the command that marks it as completed, > and then you use the waitqueue to wait for that bit to be set. Thanks for your comment. Will work on v2 patch and resubmit. Thanks, Bing > > johannes > ��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{���zW����ܨ}���Ơz�j:+v�����w����ޙ��&�)ߡ�a����z�ޗ���ݢj��w�f
