Huh. On Wed, 2023-10-25 at 18:33 +0800, Jiazi Li wrote: > If cfg80211_update_assoc_bss_entry call rb_insert_bss re-insert bss > failed because cmp_bss return 0, > Ok that's bad - so you hit the WARN_ON there? How that? We should fix that too? > this bss->rbn will continue to hold > expired data, such as __rd_parent_color. Does that matter in any way? > And this bss still in rdev->bss_list, maybe double erase in > __cfg80211_bss_expire later. > Double erase a rbtree node(with expired parent and color data) maybe > corrupt rbtree, so add a in_rbtree flag to fix this issue. This seems overly complex - couldn't we just remove it from the list too or something? It's already a case that "should never happen" so ... not sure we need to do something "good"? johannes
