Hi Alex,
aahringo@xxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 17 May 2022 20:59:39 -0400:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, May 17, 2022 at 10:53 AM Miquel Raynal
> <miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > miquel.raynal@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on Tue, 17 May 2022 15:36:55 +0200:
> >
> > > 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?
> >
> > Actually I re-read the doc and that's right, a regular unsigned long
>
> Which doc is that?
Documentation/atomic_t.txt states [SEMANTICS chapter]:
"if you find yourself only using the Non-RMW operations of
atomic_t, you do not in fact need atomic_t at all and are doing it wrong."
In this case, I was only using atomic_set() and atomic_read(), which are
both non-RMW operations.
Thanks,
Miquèl
