| commit | 5194ee82b4aafc35b32c96db11bdacea9bf548be | |
| author | Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org> | |
| Wed, 7 May 2008 15:44:20 +0000 (7 19:44 +0400) | ||
| committer | John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com> | |
| Thu, 22 May 2008 01:47:42 +0000 (21 21:47 -0400) | ||
| tree | f8d774ace25060590bf73763ba62be46822f65e0 | treesnapshot (tar.gz zip) |
| parent | 402d7752ed253369b7ab037e2d778e52d59c19ed | commitdiff |
mac80211: Fix one more call to synchronize_rcu in atomic context.
(This set applies OK without the previous one of 4 patches,
but with some fuzz in the 7th one)
The mesh_path_node_free() does so under hashwlock.
But, this one is called
1. from mesh_path_add() after an old hash is hidden and
synchronize_rcu() is calld
2. mesh_pathtbl_unregister(), when the module is being
unloaded and no devices exist to mess with this hash.
So, it seems to me, that simply removing the call is OK.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
(This set applies OK without the previous one of 4 patches,
but with some fuzz in the 7th one)
The mesh_path_node_free() does so under hashwlock.
But, this one is called
1. from mesh_path_add() after an old hash is hidden and
synchronize_rcu() is calld
2. mesh_pathtbl_unregister(), when the module is being
unloaded and no devices exist to mess with this hash.
So, it seems to me, that simply removing the call is OK.
Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@openvz.org>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
| net/mac80211/mesh_pathtbl.c | diffblobblamehistory |