[PATCH 1/3] ath10k: Ensure there are no stale ar->txqs entries.
Ben Greear
greearb at candelatech.com
Fri Aug 19 06:34:37 PDT 2016
On 08/18/2016 11:59 PM, Michal Kazior wrote:
> On 19 August 2016 at 03:26, <greearb at candelatech.com> wrote:
>> From: Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
>>
>> I was seeing kernel crashes due to accessing freed memory
>> while debugging a 9984 firmware that was crashing often.
>>
>> This patch fixes the crashes. I am not certain if there
>> is a better way or not.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c | 10 ++++++++++
>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
>> index 5659ef1..916119c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/mac.c
>> @@ -4172,8 +4172,10 @@ static void ath10k_mac_txq_init(struct ieee80211_txq *txq)
>> static void ath10k_mac_txq_unref(struct ath10k *ar, struct ieee80211_txq *txq)
>> {
>> struct ath10k_txq *artxq = (void *)txq->drv_priv;
>> + struct ath10k_txq *tmp, *walker;
>> struct ath10k_skb_cb *cb;
>> struct sk_buff *msdu;
>> + struct ieee80211_txq *txq_tmp;
>> int msdu_id;
>>
>> if (!txq)
>> @@ -4182,6 +4184,14 @@ static void ath10k_mac_txq_unref(struct ath10k *ar, struct ieee80211_txq *txq)
>> spin_lock_bh(&ar->txqs_lock);
>> if (!list_empty(&artxq->list))
>> list_del_init(&artxq->list);
>> +
>> + /* Remove from ar->txqs in case it still exists there. */
>> + list_for_each_entry_safe(walker, tmp, &ar->txqs, list) {
>> + txq_tmp = container_of((void *)walker, struct ieee80211_txq,
>> + drv_priv);
>> + if (txq_tmp == txq)
>> + list_del(&walker->list);
>> + }
>
> How could this even happen? All artxq->list accesses (add/del) are
> protected by txqs_lock so this shouldn't happen, no?
>
> Do you perhaps have the logic around txqs reworked in your tree?
I don't have any significant changes as far as I can tell.
I can build you a buggy 9984 firmware to reproduce the problem if you want...
Maybe the upstream patch could WARN_ON in this case to see if anyone else
ever hits it?
I did see a comment in the mac80211 about some assumptions on the driver with
regard to station teardown...I am not 100% sure ath10k meets that assumption,
so maybe that is why I could see this problem.
Thanks,
Ben
--
Ben Greear <greearb at candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
More information about the ath10k
mailing list