From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from s72.web-hosting.com ([198.187.29.22]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1XrlYR-0005hm-VW for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 21 Nov 2014 10:35:08 +0000 From: Sujith Manoharan MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <21615.5541.120044.376524@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2014 16:06:21 +0530 Subject: Re: [RFC] ath10k: Fix shared WEP In-Reply-To: References: <1416492382-18058-1-git-send-email-sujith@msujith.org> <21615.3019.437408.992893@gargle.gargle.HOWL> List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: Michal Kazior Cc: linux-wireless , "ath10k@lists.infradead.org" Michal Kazior wrote: > Good point, but what I'm worried it'll be easier to miss this subtlety > and introduce races in the future. I am not very familiar with ath10k locking, but peer_keys is also used in ath10k_clear_peer_keys(), where it relies on conf_mutex. Should that be addressed too ? > Do you have it saved somewhere? If so, can you post it, please? http://pastebin.com/yywiPZXL Sujith _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k