On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 5:28 AM, Luca Coelho <l...@coelho.fi> wrote: > From: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> > > In preparation for unconditionally passing the struct timer_list pointer to > all timer callbacks, switch to using the new timer_setup() and from_timer() > to pass the timer pointer explicitly. > > The RCU lifetime on baid_data is unclear, so this adds a direct copy of the > rcu_ptr passed to the original callback. It may be possible to improve this > to just use baid_data->mvm->baid_map[baid_data->baid] instead. > > Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes.b...@intel.com> > Cc: Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumb...@intel.com> > Cc: Luca Coelho <luciano.coe...@intel.com> > Cc: Intel Linux Wireless <linuxw...@intel.com> > Cc: Kalle Valo <kv...@codeaurora.org> > Cc: Sara Sharon <sara.sha...@intel.com> > Cc: linux-wirel...@vger.kernel.org > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> > Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coe...@intel.com> > --- > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/mvm.h | 3 ++- > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/rxmq.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/mvm/sta.c | 18 +++++++++--------- > 3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
Hi, Thanks for taking this! I had a question on timing: is this expected to land for 4.15? If not, I would like to take this via the timers tree, since it is one of the few remaining conversions. Thanks! -Kees -- Kees Cook Pixel Security
