Return-path: Received: from ti-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.142.190]:3849 "EHLO ti-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752267AbZCPSSp (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Mar 2009 14:18:45 -0400 Received: by ti-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d10so2309199tib.23 for ; Mon, 16 Mar 2009 11:18:42 -0700 (PDT) From: Sujith MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: <18878.38992.238041.18093@gargle.gargle.HOWL> (sfid-20090316_191849_392028_A6C4D80F) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:50:00 +0530 To: Johannes Berg Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Jouni.Malinen@Atheros.com, me@bobcopeland.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mac80211: Tear down aggregation sessions for suspend/resume In-Reply-To: <1237212162.16396.15.camel@johannes.local> References: <18878.9292.503830.420780@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <1237212162.16396.15.camel@johannes.local> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 15:35 +0530, Sujith wrote: > > > + /* Tear down aggregation sessions */ > > + if (hw->flags & IEEE80211_HW_AMPDU_AGGREGATION) { > > + list_for_each_entry(sta, &local->sta_list, list) { > > + set_sta_flags(sta, WLAN_STA_SUSPEND); > > + ieee80211_sta_tear_down_BA_sessions(sta); > > + } > > + } > > Doesn't that, and the corresponding code in resume, need to be using the > rcu-safe list iteration primitives and rcu_read_lock(), or acquire the > sta_lock like the other iteration? While we should be more or less > quiescent at this point, I wouldn't really want to bet on it. Ah, right, it should be rcu-protected. Will send out a v3 tomorrow. Sujith