Do the ax25_list_lock, ax25_dev_lock, linkfail_lockreally, ax25_frag_lock and
listen_lock have to be bh-safe?
Do the netrom and rose locks have to be bh-safe?
A device might be deleted after lookup in the SIOCADDRT ioctl but before it's
being used.
Routes to a device being taken down might be deleted by ax25_rt_device_down
but added by somebody else before the device has been deleted fully.
The ax25_rt_find_route synopsys is pervert but I somehow had to deal with
the race caused by the static variable in it's previous implementation.
Implement proper socket locking in netrom and rose.
Check socket locking when ax25_rcv is sending to raw sockets. In particular
ax25_send_to_raw() seems fishy. Heck - ax25_rcv is fishy.
Handle XID and TEST frames properly.
src='/cgit.png' alt='cgit logo'/>
brcmfmac: add support for BCM43455 with modalias sdio:c00v02D0dA9BF
BCM43455 is a more recent revision of the BCM4345. Some of the BCM43455
got a dedicated SDIO device ID which is currently not supported by
brcmfmac.
Adding the new sdio_device_id to brcmfmac is enough to get the BCM43455
supported because the chip itself is already supported (due to BCM4345
support in the driver).
Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com>
Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Reviewed-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
Tested-by: Andreas Färber <afaerber@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>