From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:64245 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751318Ab2IELta (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Sep 2012 07:49:30 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Sep 2012 13:49:11 +0200 From: Stanislaw Gruszka To: Arend van Spriel Cc: "John W. Linville" , Linux Wireless List , stable , Jonathan Nieder , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Camale=F3n?= , Milan Bouchet-Valat Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] brcmsmac: rework of mac80211 .flush() callback operation Message-ID: <20120905114910.GA2466@redhat.com> (sfid-20120905_134934_538034_5B64E2CB) References: <1346838562-4818-1-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com> <1346838562-4818-3-git-send-email-arend@broadcom.com> <20120905102046.GC2311@redhat.com> <50472B74.5060104@broadcom.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <50472B74.5060104@broadcom.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 12:37:40PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: > On 09/05/2012 12:20 PM, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote: > >On Wed, Sep 05, 2012 at 11:49:22AM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >>+ ret = wait_event_timeout(wl->tx_flush_wq, > >>+ brcms_tx_flush_completed(wl), > >>+ msecs_to_jiffies(BRCMS_FLUSH_TIMEOUT)); > >>+ > >>+ ieee80211_wake_queues(hw); > >>+ WARN_ON(!ret); > >Any particular reason why this WARN_ON is after ieee80211_wake_queues() ? > > > > The wait has a timeout so the warning indicates flush did not > complete as in the old implementation. Maybe a WARN_ON_ONCE() would > be better, but I have not observed the warning yet. Yeah, but I rather asked why it is _after_ ieee80211_wake_queues(), not before, just after wait_event_timeout(). Not big deal thought, just if something wrong will happen in ieee80211_wake_queues() order of error prints will be confusing. Stanislaw