[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1504704060.13457.20.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2017 15:21:00 +0200
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To: Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@...hat.com>
Cc: Matteo Croce <mcroce@...hat.com>, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: hung task in mac80211
On Wed, 2017-09-06 at 15:19 +0200, Stefano Brivio wrote:
> On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 14:48:35 +0200
> Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
> > I'll look in a bit - but
> >
> > > + mutex_unlock(&sta->ampdu_mlme.mtx);
> > > ___ieee80211_stop_rx_ba_session(
> > > sta, tid, WLAN_BACK_RECIPIENT,
> > > WLAN_REASON_QSTA_TIMEOUT,
> > > true);
> >
> > This already has three underscores so shouldn't drop.
>
> Right, of course.
>
> > [...]
> > > + mutex_unlock(&sta->ampdu_mlme.mtx);
> > > __ieee80211_start_rx_ba_session(sta, 0,
> > > 0,
> > > 0, 1, tid,
> >
> > maybe this one needs a ___ version then?
>
> Either that, or as it's a single call, perhaps just the following?
> Matter of taste I guess...
I don't think it's a matter of taste - for me, in principle, dropping
locks for small sections of code where the larger section holds it is a
bug waiting to happen. It may (may, I don't even know) be OK here, but
in general it's something to avoid.
johannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists