[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <457CDD7B.8080207@lwfinger.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 22:24:27 -0600
From: Larry Finger <larry.finger@...inger.net>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, dsd@...too.org
CC: Broadcom Linux <bcm43xx-dev@...ts.berlios.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ieee80211softmac: Fix errors related to the work_struct
changes
Ulrich Kunitz wrote:
> The signature of work functions changed recently from a context
> pointer to the work structure pointer. This caused a problem in
> the ieee80211softmac code, because the ieee80211softmac_assox_work
> function has been called directly with a parameter explicitly
> casted to (void*). This compiled correctly but resulted in a
> softlock, because mutex_lock was called with the wrong memory
> address. The patch fixes the problem. Another issue was a wrong
> call of the schedule_work function. Softmac works again and this
> fixes the problem I mentioned earlier in the zd1211rw rx tasklet
> patch. The patch is against Linus' tree (commit af1713e0).
>
> Signed-off-by: Ulrich Kunitz <kune@...ne-taler.de>
Thanks Ulrich for this patch. I had spent the better part of 2 days bisecting Linus's git tree
trying to isolate the problem that kept the system from booting when my bcm43xx card was installed.
I thought that when someone _BROKE_ an interface with this kind of change, it was their duty to fix
_ALL_ parts of the system that uses this facility. At a minimum, shouldn't all maintainers get a
heads up? I don't subscribe to LKML, but I peruse the summary and I certainly do not recall seeing a
warning that this change was coming.
Larry
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists