On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 08:55:11AM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 12:44:42PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: > > From: Piotr Haber <phaber@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > In the event that tx packet can not be queued by the driver > > the packet is dropped. Propagate that information to the .tx() > > callback to make sure the freed packet is not accessed after > > that. > > > > This has happened causing slab corruptions as reported by > > Stanislaw Gruszka. > > > > Bug #47721: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=47721 > > > > Reported-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@xxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieterpg@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Piotr Haber <phaber@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > Fixing a kernel bug so based on the wireless repository. The > > fix for wireless-next will be posted separately as the patches > > differ. So this patch does not need to be merged to the > > wireless-next tree. > > Let me know if I can be of help in resolving the conflicts. Fwiw the fix > looks like it ought to be easy to make on top of wireless-next, but I do > have a couple of comments. > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmsmac/ampdu.c b/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmsmac/ampdu.c > > index be5bcfb..a6605b1 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmsmac/ampdu.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/brcm80211/brcmsmac/ampdu.c > > @@ -901,7 +901,7 @@ brcms_c_ampdu_dotxstatus_complete(struct ampdu_info *ampdu, struct scb *scb, > > struct ieee80211_hdr *h; > > u16 seq, start_seq = 0, bindex, index, mcl; > > u8 mcs = 0; > > - bool ba_recd = false, ack_recd = false; > > + bool ba_recd = false, ack_recd = false, last_packet = false; > > u8 suc_mpdu = 0, tot_mpdu = 0; > > uint supr_status; > > bool update_rate = true, retry = true, tx_error = false; > > @@ -1010,6 +1010,8 @@ brcms_c_ampdu_dotxstatus_complete(struct ampdu_info *ampdu, struct scb *scb, > > > > index = TX_SEQ_TO_INDEX(seq); > > ack_recd = false; > > + last_packet = (((mcl & TXC_AMPDU_MASK) >> TXC_AMPDU_SHIFT) == > > + TXC_AMPDU_LAST); > > if (ba_recd) { > > bindex = MODSUB_POW2(seq, start_seq, SEQNUM_MAX); > > BCMMSG(wiphy, > > @@ -1074,8 +1076,7 @@ brcms_c_ampdu_dotxstatus_complete(struct ampdu_info *ampdu, struct scb *scb, > > tot_mpdu++; > > > > /* break out if last packet of ampdu */ > > - if (((mcl & TXC_AMPDU_MASK) >> TXC_AMPDU_SHIFT) == > > - TXC_AMPDU_LAST) > > + if (last_packet) > > break; > > > > p = dma_getnexttxp(wlc->hw->di[queue], DMA_RANGE_TRANSMITTED); > > These changes are effectively a no-op and don't really seem to have > anything to do with fixing the bug. I concur -- could you remove these bits for the 3.7 fix? > > > @@ -7288,10 +7290,12 @@ void brcms_c_sendpkt_mac80211(struct brcms_c_info *wlc, struct sk_buff *sdu, > > prio = ieee80211_is_data(d11_header->frame_control) ? sdu->priority : > > MAXPRIO; > > fifo = prio2fifo[prio]; > > - if (brcms_c_d11hdrs_mac80211(wlc, hw, sdu, scb, 0, 1, fifo, 0)) > > - return; > > - brcms_c_txq_enq(wlc, scb, sdu, BRCMS_PRIO_TO_PREC(prio)); > > + brcms_c_d11hdrs_mac80211(wlc, hw, sdu, scb, 0, 1, fifo, 0); > > Maybe brcms_c_d11hdrs_mac80211() should return void? I've never > understood what its return value was supposed to represent. > > Cheers, > Seth > > -- John W. Linville Someday the world will need a hero, and you linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx might be all we have. Be ready. -- 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
