On 22-5-2017 14:09, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> On 5/22/2017 12:57 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> On Mon, 2017-05-22 at 12:36 +0200, Sander Eikelenboom wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I encountered this splat with 4.12-RC2.
>>
>> Ugh, yeah, I should've seen that in the review.
>>
>> Arend, please take a look at this. cfg80211_sched_scan_results() cannot
>> sleep, so you can't rtnl_lock() in there. Looks like you can just rely
>> on RCU though?
>
> I see. I think you are right on RCU. Don't have the code in front of me
> now, but I think the lookup has an ASSERT_RTNL. Will look into it after
> my monday meeting :-p
I realized I have a laptop lying around with intel 3160 wifi chip and
tried to reproduce the issue. Did not run into the splat running
4.12-rc1 from wireless-drivers-next repo. I did not get the email from
Sander so I don't know any details.
Here is what I changed based on the info Johannes provided. Can you
please check if this get rid of the splat and let me know.
Regards,
Arend
---
diff --git a/net/wireless/scan.c b/net/wireless/scan.c
index 14d5f0c..04833bb 100644
--- a/net/wireless/scan.c
+++ b/net/wireless/scan.c
@@ -322,9 +322,7 @@ static void cfg80211_del_sched_scan_req(struct
cfg80211_regi
{
struct cfg80211_sched_scan_request *pos;
- ASSERT_RTNL();
-
- list_for_each_entry(pos, &rdev->sched_scan_req_list, list) {
+ list_for_each_entry_rcu(pos, &rdev->sched_scan_req_list, list) {
if (pos->reqid == reqid)
return pos;
}
@@ -398,13 +396,13 @@ void cfg80211_sched_scan_results(struct wiphy
*wiphy, u64
trace_cfg80211_sched_scan_results(wiphy, reqid);
/* ignore if we're not scanning */
- rtnl_lock();
+ rcu_read_lock();
request = cfg80211_find_sched_scan_req(rdev, reqid);
if (request) {
request->report_results = true;
queue_work(cfg80211_wq, &rdev->sched_scan_res_wk);
}
- rtnl_unlock();
+ rcu_read_unlock();
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(cfg80211_sched_scan_results);
