linux-wireless.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Cc: linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Dmitry Shmidt <dimitrysh@google.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] nl80211: allow multiple active scheduled scan requests
Date: Mon, 02 Jan 2017 11:44:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1483353841.4596.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1482315616-4721-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>


> +	/*
> +	 * allow only one legacy scheduled scan if user-space
> +	 * does not indicate multiple scheduled scan support.
> +	 */
> +	if (!info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_SCHED_SCAN_MULTI] &&
> +	    cfg80211_legacy_sched_scan_active(rdev))
>  		return -EINPROGRESS;

That probably doesn't go far enough - if legacy one is active then we
probably shouldn't allow a new MULTI one either (or abandon the legacy
one) so that older userspace doesn't get confused with multiple
notifications from sched scans it didn't start.
 
> +	if (rdev->sched_scan_req_count == rdev->wiphy.max_sched_scan_reqs)
> +		return -ENOSPC;

Do we really want to do the double-accounting, just to avoid counting
the list length here?

> +	/* leave request id zero for legacy request */

why? The ID would be ignored, so why special-case it?

> +static void cfg80211_del_sched_scan_req(struct
> cfg80211_registered_device *rdev,
> +					struct
> cfg80211_sched_scan_request *req)
> +{
> +	list_del_rcu(&req->list);
> +	kfree_rcu(req, rcu_head);
> +	synchronize_rcu();
> +	rdev->sched_scan_req_count--;
> +}

That's bogus - either you use kfree_rcu() or synchronize_rcu() (the
former is much better); combining both makes no sense.

> +bool cfg80211_legacy_sched_scan_active(struct
> cfg80211_registered_device *rdev)
> +{
> +	struct cfg80211_sched_scan_request *req;
> +
> +	req = list_first_or_null_rcu(&rdev->sched_scan_req_list,
> +				     struct
> cfg80211_sched_scan_request, list);
> +	/* request id 0 indicates legacy request in progress */
> +	return req && !req->reqid;
> +}

Ok, fair enough.

johannes

  reply	other threads:[~2017-01-02 10:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-16 22:47 [PATCH] RFC: Universal scan proposal dimitrysh
2016-11-17 20:56 ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-11-18 23:53   ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-11-22  7:24 ` Luca Coelho
2016-11-22 17:29   ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-11-22 20:41     ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-11-22 20:54       ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-11-23  8:43         ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-11-28 19:25           ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-12-05 14:28 ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-05 18:32   ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-12-07  6:44     ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-07 18:39       ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-12-07 20:51         ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-12-08 22:35           ` Dmitry Shmidt
2016-12-09 11:10             ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-12-13 16:06             ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-03 20:45               ` Dmitry Shmidt
2017-01-04 13:28                 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-04 20:32                   ` Dmitry Shmidt
2017-01-05 11:46                     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 13:39                       ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-01-05 13:44                         ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 19:59                           ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-01-09 10:48                             ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 12:07                               ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-01-11 13:14                                 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-05 20:45                       ` Dmitry Shmidt
2017-01-09 10:45                         ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-09 11:19                           ` Arend Van Spriel
2016-12-13 16:04         ` Johannes Berg
2016-12-21 10:20           ` [RFC] nl80211: allow multiple active scheduled scan requests Arend van Spriel
2017-01-02 10:44             ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2017-01-03 12:25               ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-01-04  9:59                 ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-04 10:20                   ` Arend Van Spriel
2017-01-04 10:30                     ` Johannes Berg
2017-01-04 10:34                       ` Arend Van Spriel

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1483353841.4596.2.camel@sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
    --cc=dimitrysh@google.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).