[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230510201205.308542-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 22:12:02 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH v2 0/3] wifi locking simplification
The rationale etc. didn't change in v2, so see
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230510160428.175409-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net
In v2 I dropped the workqueue locking patch and consequently
made new wiphy_work and wiphy_delayed_work things.
I kept the pause/resume for the workqueue because not that I
had it, it seemed simpler than keeping track of "should it be
paused" in a separate bool variable to not queue the work when
it shouldn't be ...
Still just serves to illustrate things, I didn't really test it.
johannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists