I think this one had a regression and needs another init-lock-early patch to keep from causing
problems?
It certainly broke my 5.17-ish kernel...
Thanks,
Ben
On 7/19/22 6:17 PM, Sasha Levin wrote:
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@xxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit f856373e2f31ffd340e47e2b00027bd4070f74b3 ]
When a vif is being removed and sdata->bss is cleared, __ieee80211_wake_txqs
can still be called on it, which crashes as soon as sdata->bss is being
dereferenced.
To fix this properly, check for SDATA_STATE_RUNNING before waking queues,
and take the fq lock when setting it (to ensure that __ieee80211_wake_txqs
observes the change when running on a different CPU)
Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau <nbd@xxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220531190824.60019-1-nbd@xxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/mac80211/iface.c | 2 ++
net/mac80211/util.c | 3 +++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/iface.c b/net/mac80211/iface.c
index ddc001ad9055..48bda8aaa90a 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/iface.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/iface.c
@@ -803,7 +803,9 @@ static void ieee80211_do_stop(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
bool cancel_scan;
struct cfg80211_nan_func *func;
+ spin_lock_bh(&local->fq.lock);
clear_bit(SDATA_STATE_RUNNING, &sdata->state);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&local->fq.lock);
cancel_scan = rcu_access_pointer(local->scan_sdata) == sdata;
if (cancel_scan)
diff --git a/net/mac80211/util.c b/net/mac80211/util.c
index c1c117fdf318..8ae0186091b6 100644
--- a/net/mac80211/util.c
+++ b/net/mac80211/util.c
@@ -250,6 +250,9 @@ static void __ieee80211_wake_txqs(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, int ac)
local_bh_disable();
spin_lock(&fq->lock);
+ if (!test_bit(SDATA_STATE_RUNNING, &sdata->state))
+ goto out;
+
if (sdata->vif.type == NL80211_IFTYPE_AP)
ps = &sdata->bss->ps;
--
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
