Return-path: Received: from charlotte.tuxdriver.com ([70.61.120.58]:60885 "EHLO smtp.tuxdriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754684Ab0HaR7n (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:59:43 -0400 Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:55:47 -0400 From: "John W. Linville" To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Miles Lane , rjw@sisk.pl, maciej.rutecki@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.36] wireless: register wiphy rfkill w/o holding cfg80211_mutex Message-ID: <20100831175546.GD2484@tuxdriver.com> References: <1283206222-21830-1-git-send-email-linville@tuxdriver.com> <1283237477.3733.0.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1283237477.3733.0.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 08:51:17AM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > Thanks, > > > + res = rfkill_register(rdev->rfkill); > > + if (res) > > + return res; > > + > > mutex_lock(&cfg80211_mutex); > > > > res = device_add(&rdev->wiphy.dev); > > if (res) > > goto out_unlock; > > but does that behave correctly in sysfs? rfkill_register should create > some sysfs stuff that points to the device that now only gets added > later, doesn't that break things? Yeah, I see that now -- should have looked closer. John -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@tuxdriver.com might be all we have. Be ready.