From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from he.sipsolutions.net ([78.46.109.217]:53575 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755884Ab2LMSXr (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2012 13:23:47 -0500 Message-ID: <1355423047.9463.9.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20121213_192352_293430_50F585FD) Subject: Re: Add a new work-queue for destructing stations? From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 19:24:07 +0100 In-Reply-To: <50CA1C44.5030300@candelatech.com> References: <50CA1470.4030107@candelatech.com> (sfid-20121213_184629_945929_240FAE82) <1355421541.9463.8.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <50CA1C44.5030300@candelatech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 2012-12-13 at 10:19 -0800, Ben Greear wrote: > > I don't think that's easy, but you're welcome to try. The > > free_sta_work() function references the sdata so it absolutely must run > > at this point. > So, cancel_work_sync(&sdata->work) would appear to remove > all pending sdata->work items from the work-queue. As long as > there are no other different work items that reference > sdata (and maybe there are..I haven't looked at all of them), > then we should be safe to execute the free_sta_work() > on a different work-queue safely, I think.... Sorry, I don't get it. free_sta_work() *itself* has to be executed before the sdata is destroyed. cancel_work_sync(&sdata->work) has nothing to do with free_sta_work. johannes