From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from xc.sipsolutions.net ([83.246.72.84]:44179 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751569AbYL3KpW (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:45:22 -0500 Subject: Re: [RFC v2] mac80211: Add 802.11h CSA support From: Johannes Berg To: Sujith Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, jouni.malinen@atheros.com In-Reply-To: <18777.64102.60878.194252@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20081230_114208_708501_346345E9) References: <18777.63336.140527.717269@localhost.localdomain> <1230633305.3850.2.camel@johannes> <18777.64102.60878.194252@localhost.localdomain> (sfid-20081230_114208_708501_346345E9) Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-LWwfI1o/1HNeo9ckP7vQ" Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2008 11:45:49 +0100 Message-Id: <1230633949.3850.11.camel@johannes> (sfid-20081230_114526_905459_0B67F52B) Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: --=-LWwfI1o/1HNeo9ckP7vQ Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2008-12-30 at 16:09 +0530, Sujith wrote: > Johannes Berg wrote: > > We already have a bss pointer here, would it be better to pass that in, > > avoid the bss lookup, and do the bss lookup manually in the action fram= e > > case, to avoid a double lookup here? > >=20 >=20 > We don't have a bss pointer in ieee80211_rx_h_action(), where CSA > action frames are handled too. Yeah I know, I'm just wondering if it's worth saving the lookup in the other case by doing the lookup outside of ieee80211_process_chanswitch() and in ieee80211_rx_h_action() > > Didn't you want to put this into the workqueue? >=20 > Calling ieee80211_hw_config() from the timer was problematic since > drivers might use a mutex, this won't matter. > But if it makes things clearer, I can add it to the workqueue here too. But the RX stuff (rx_h_action) is from a tasklet or directly from the driver, and in the tasklet we can't sleep either, and if we call back from ieee80211_rx() into rx_h_action into the driver again via config() the driver might not like it? Or am I totally off base right now? johannes --=-LWwfI1o/1HNeo9ckP7vQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: Johannes Berg (powerbook) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJJWfvaAAoJEKVg1VMiehFYNPMP/1OWodcrKmqjxcKIJsaeBQqr qPh2PIakxag2w14EGcylzqInerIMsGIiEDroVuyWka46/6NVFE238xzj1itYgyT+ u3uO5gtcjdLntc49XBU0FbCaQ8p/XXkNskyLmn3hjv5Xm1lWZurV+38xqk4V+xg6 QUqo9G2L94h48qggpy8KJCrEvcJ5NRy/VfC2mIj1eYwGEUhdg1KNmVBaIMClx1d7 pM+I+ySmhFdVh5OBYcMk9qgq/GSH7IGjdnaG1czXo7UqtU6VONWLz/81R6Fk+PSs h+Ax/Reo9y/U2uQ4o4EcjOehX0hwiFXuaC9AxLgoQWmqJUOaiuxeYsSs7uCPRDKG AxIG4nqhwY5L8PDwZc2gWlR1/AuqOnq3rAUHpfAMOBvAGDyqxop6t09GYPwdcy2t ba1cHWmBeTOfX7aVmX4rj0blc6wAnywc/529JX8tlf03iad3BhY8jmrHTKBdiExn IdAj4zdYaHyx5fsBFg0Ep+POFSLrH3Teqm4Ny+7b5cIAj3PSdcsVaGT+lPMQXxLt +NqROR3r6M687DZUSmt6+0zSBHDAqS7IuAq292IMqiZbvUOJFudfjESOP83dnzIA wtSf08r5mawdKs5isPvxu1uVzWMidHLxEQCStQPpIyYeDOSw7tyc671dkZkdnYcN JVeyBbr5ksHA+hRjmH2y =E6H5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-LWwfI1o/1HNeo9ckP7vQ--