From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-wg0-x232.google.com (mail-wg0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A384C21F1FE; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:34:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wg0-f50.google.com with SMTP id x13so10955294wgg.21 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:34:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pTfjJ263ddrkWWLsoCSFVdrB+VnH4/q4TptBoqZvIc0=; b=dj0jtCz3czEbmOfHismk260coK2SUhw9H+cwK2hdF6CtQXlsGiItSfO1ZNRpn7tJ7F hkyzsgxv6PBBU8Gft+Nhq/GkrQa1c00pSiqNJB+6zy8xulP4OhyP7/wSqNKToCSwW9eB cfrs0zvx8mDZkks5m4Zb4AxABtcIMEFiTwBJTql5QQdq2PvlduGa3p1VqmQ8F988acZT 0yzm/kw6ANauMtuFZVh+MGNtPsCOPD2nTtJvm8m0S+Bb+IF1yh8tckfx9ehdrngzp0Ky hhCTHUN7YHoSB1Ijzfw4nTsBstrf7I9TrpeUFMHerdnvYYPg5u91kH1bvs4r7kheJCkq 4xZA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.6.106 with SMTP id z10mr7461639wjz.1.1397662456655; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:34:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.177.10 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:34:16 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <534E8168.50003@openwrt.org> References: <534E8168.50003@openwrt.org> Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 08:34:16 -0700 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Felix Fietkau Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: cerowrt@lists.bufferbloat.net, "cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net" Subject: Re: [Cerowrt-devel] Fwd: [bug #442] ath9k queue hang X-BeenThere: cerowrt-devel@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: Development issues regarding the cerowrt test router project List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2014 15:34:19 -0000 On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 2014-04-15 21:00, Dave Taht wrote: >> Thx felix! >> >> Given that there seems to be a potential race in the code >> review I did at: >> >> http://www.bufferbloat.net/issues/442#note-22 >> >> another thought is to make the increment and decrement of >> >> txq->pending_frame atomic, or to do a flush before the unlock > I'm not convinced that there's a race that involves txq->pending_frames. > There is no need to make the increment/decrement atomic, because that > variable is already protected by the txq lock. It and "stopped" are briefly unprotected along that code path. > >> What tree is this patch against? > mac80211 from OpenWrt trunk. Thx, will try your patch today. > - Felix --=20 Dave T=C3=A4ht NSFW: https://w2.eff.org/Censorship/Internet_censorship_bills/russell_0296_= indecent.article