On Tue, Feb 14, 2023 at 02:55:02PM -0800, Chris Lew wrote:
> On 1/9/2023 2:38 PM, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> > In the event that an intent advertisement arrives on an unknown channel
> > the fifo is not advanced, resulting in the same message being handled
> > over and over.
> >
> > Fixes: dacbb35e930f ("rpmsg: glink: Receive and store the remote intent buffers")
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/rpmsg/qcom_glink_native.c | 5 +++--
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/rpmsg/qcom_glink_native.c b/drivers/rpmsg/qcom_glink_native.c
> > index f36740cb6866..7b1320b1579e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/rpmsg/qcom_glink_native.c
> > +++ b/drivers/rpmsg/qcom_glink_native.c
> > @@ -946,12 +946,12 @@ static void qcom_glink_handle_intent(struct qcom_glink *glink,
> > spin_unlock_irqrestore(&glink->idr_lock, flags);
> > if (!channel) {
> > dev_err(glink->dev, "intents for non-existing channel\n");
> > - return;
> > + goto advance_rx;
> > }
> > msg = kmalloc(msglen, GFP_ATOMIC);
> > if (!msg)
> > - return;
> > + goto advance_rx;
>
>
> Should we be dropping the packet for this case? If we try again later more
> memory might be available to handle the command.
>
You're right, we found a channel above, but we don't have enough memory
to handle the message right now. That seems like a message worth not
throwing away.
Thanks,
Bjorn
> > qcom_glink_rx_peak(glink, msg, 0, msglen);
> > @@ -973,6 +973,7 @@ static void qcom_glink_handle_intent(struct qcom_glink *glink,
> > }
> > kfree(msg);
> > +advance_rx:
> > qcom_glink_rx_advance(glink, ALIGN(msglen, 8));
> > }
> >
