On 11/26/2012 03:55 PM, 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. I have fix for wireless-next available already. Will post it later today. >> 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. Agree. I noticed that as well and was in doubt whether I should keep it or not. The commit message does not cover this so I resubmit the patch (already did). >> @@ -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. All code patch in the function return 0 so it could be made void. Gr. AvS -- 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
