On Friday 26 September 2008, Jouni Malinen wrote: > (fixed linux-wireless address to get this to more appropriate people) > > On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 12:00:49PM +1000, Iwo Mergler wrote: > > > I'm trying to get to the bottom of a bug that stops me from using > > hostapd - mac80211 - rt2x00 - rt73usb as an access point. > > > > Initially, I assumed a bug within the rt2x00 driver and added some > > tracing code to that. However, it now looks like the error is more > > likely within mac80211 or hostapd. > > > I'm testing this on two systems, vmware-based x86 and ARM. The bug > > exists on both, but on the x86 the AP actually emits beacons, while > > on the ARM the system crashes on a bad spinlock. > > > > The reason for the problem is the driver private data (vif), which > > doesn't get initialised, due to a missing call from mac80211. > > This works with other drivers.. Not that that would automatically mean > that something wouldn't be wrong in mac80211 ;-). As far as I can tell, > hostapd does things the way it is supposed to and the main question > would be in the area of what mac80211 does with frames injected through > a monitor event. It probably works with other drivers because those use hardware sequence counters for their hardware. ;) > As far as the crash itself is concerned, this may be an issue in the > driver. Please note that net/mac80211.h explicitly notes that vif can be > NULL for injected frames (i.e., frame from monitor interface). rt2x00 > seems to be doing some kind of mapping from vif to rt2x00_intf with > vif_to_intf() in rt2x00queue_create_tx_descriptor(). That function > handles the NULL case by not allocating a sequence number which itself > seems incorrect; all the virtual interfaces sharing the same STA/AP > interface should share the same sequence number space. So to what AP is a monitor interface associated with then? Or to which virtual interface has it been tied with? Please note that som ehardware support multiple Master mode interfaces, so it doesn't know which monitor interface would be tied to which Monitor interface to share the sequence counter with. Note that the vif structure is only created when the add_interface() callback function is used. When you send a frame, it is fine to send it over the monitor interface as long as you don't expect the driver to control the sequence counter for that interface. > I don't have the debug code that produced the BUG shown in the output > below, so I'm not sure what exactly it was trying to do. However, it if > expect the vif to be always set, it will fail. The odd part here is that > the vif reported in the driver is not NULL; I would have expected that > to be the case.. Again, not having the debug code makes it difficult to > figure out what happened. If mac80211 is indeed setting struct > ieee80211_tx_info.control.vif to point to the monitor interface and not > NULL, that would likely be an issue in mac80211; otherwise, the driver > (and/or debug code) is likely to do something wrong with the vif > pointer. Ok, so that would mean there are 2 issues in mac80211. One is that it is not setting the vif to NULL for monitor interfaces, and the second one is that it requests a sequence number from the driver for injected frames which go into the monitor interface. Ivo > I'll leave the following details in for whoever is reading > linux-wireless and may have missed the original message.. > > > The trace below was captured during hostapd startup. Sometimes there > > is a discrepancy of 4 bytes between the printed pointer values of a > > particular vif - it's still the same vif. > > > > Here goes: > > > > [T87]ieee80211_open:194: dev->name=mon.wlan0 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:309: sdata->dev->name=mon.wlan0 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:310: sdata->vif.type=5, &sdata->vif=c3b957b4 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:316: IEEE80211_IF_TYPE_MNTR > > > > Hostapd has opened the monitor interface. Because the type is > > IEEE80211_IF_TYPE_MNTR, the driver's add_interface method is > > not called. This leaves vif=c3b957b4 uninitialised. > > > > > > [T87]ieee80211_open:194: dev->name=wlan0 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:309: sdata->dev->name=wlan0 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:310: sdata->vif.type=1, &sdata->vif=c3a197b4 > > [T87]ieee80211_open:345: Calling local->ops->add_interface() > > [T87]rt2x00mac_add_interface:211: vif=c3a197b4 > > [T87]rt2x00mac_add_interface:307: Canary Check c3a197b8 > > > > Here, hostapd has opened wlan0 in AP mode (sdata->vif.type=1). > > This code path in ieee80211_open calls the add_interface method > > which ends up to be rt2x00mac_add_interface in our case. This > > initialises vif=c3a197b4. The 'canary' is a couple of known > > magic values I use to detect uninitialised vif data. > > > > Next, hostapd attempts to send a packet to the monitor interface: > > > > [T87]ieee80211_monitor_start_xmit:1397: skb=c2c0e710, vif=00000004 > > [T87]ieee80211_master_start_xmit:1332: odev=c3b95000 (.name=mon.wlan0) > > [T87]ieee80211_master_start_xmit:1339: osdata=c3b95460, &osdata->vif=c3b957b4 > > [T87]ieee80211_master_start_xmit:1378: skb=c2c0e710, vif=c3b957b8 > > > > ieee80211_master_start_xmit finds the correct vif=c3b957b8 > > (which is not initialised) and calls the driver. > > > > [T87]__ieee80211_tx:1063: skb=c2c0e710, vif=c3b957b8 > > [T87]rt2x00mac_tx:117: skb=c2c0e710, vif=c3b957b8 > > [T87]rt2x00queue_write_tx_frame:405: skb=c2c0e710, vif=c3b957b8 > > [T87]rt2x00queue_create_tx_descriptor:171: enter (1) > > [T87]rt2x00queue_create_tx_descriptor:175: skb=c2c0e710, vif=c3b957b8 > > [T87]rt2x00queue_create_tx_descriptor:178: Canary Check c3b957b8 > > [T87]rt2x00queue_create_tx_descriptor:178: The canary died. canary1=00000000, canary2=00000000, lock=1 > > kernel BUG at drivers/net/wireless/rt2x00/rt2x00queue.c:178! > > ... > > > > The debugging code detected the uninitialised vif and called BUG(). > > > > ==== > > > > As far as I can see, there are two possible reasons for this. > > > > 1) Hostapd shouldn't have sent packets out of the monitor interface. > > In that case, mac80211 should have thrown an error at hostapd. > > > > 2) ieee80211_open should have called the add_interface method, even > > for monitor mode. > > > > I asked Ivo van Doorn (the author of the rt2x00 drivers) about this, > > here is the reply: > > > > Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > > > > > Well sending through the monitor interface is fine, as long as the userspace agent > > > that does this sets the sequence number. There is no way rt2x00 can create correct > > > sequence numbers for multiple interfaces when it has to keep monitor interfaces into account. > > > > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
