aahringo@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Sun, 15 May 2022 18:30:15 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 10:34 AM Miquel Raynal
> <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > We should never start a transmission after the queue has been stopped.
> >
> > But because it might work we don't kill the function here but rather
> > warn loudly the user that something is wrong.
> >
> > Set an atomic when the queue will remain stopped. Reset this atomic when
> > the queue actually gets restarded. Just check this atomic to know if the
> > transmission is legitimate, warn if it is not.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/net/cfg802154.h | 1 +
> > net/mac802154/tx.c | 16 +++++++++++++++-
> > net/mac802154/util.c | 1 +
> > 3 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/net/cfg802154.h b/include/net/cfg802154.h
> > index 8b6326aa2d42..a1370e87233e 100644
> > --- a/include/net/cfg802154.h
> > +++ b/include/net/cfg802154.h
> > @@ -218,6 +218,7 @@ struct wpan_phy {
> > struct mutex queue_lock;
> > atomic_t ongoing_txs;
> > atomic_t hold_txs;
> > + atomic_t queue_stopped;
>
> Maybe some test_bit()/set_bit() is better there?
What do you mean? Shall I change the atomic_t type of queue_stopped?
Isn't the atomic_t preferred in this situation?
