From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@ispras.ru>,
Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@realtek.com>
Cc: Bitterblue Smith <rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com>,
Bernie Huang <phhuang@realtek.com>,
"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"lvc-project@linuxtesting.org" <lvc-project@linuxtesting.org>,
"stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rtw v4 2/4] wifi: rtw89: fix tx_wait initialization race
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 05:47:37 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <08b25263c6874a089e4a271cb95a9cb7@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250917095302.2908617-3-pchelkin@ispras.ru>
Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin@ispras.ru> wrote:
> Now that nullfunc skbs are recycled in a separate work item in the driver,
> the following race during initialization and processing of those skbs
> might lead to noticeable bugs:
>
> Waiting thread Completing thread
>
> rtw89_core_send_nullfunc()
> rtw89_core_tx_write_link()
> ...
> rtw89_pci_txwd_submit()
> skb_data->wait = NULL
> /* add skb to the queue */
> skb_queue_tail(&txwd->queue, skb)
> rtw89_pci_napi_poll()
> ...
> rtw89_pci_release_txwd_skb()
> /* get skb from the queue */
> skb_unlink(skb, &txwd->queue)
> rtw89_pci_tx_status()
> rtw89_core_tx_wait_complete()
> /* use incorrect skb_data->wait */
> rtw89_core_tx_kick_off_and_wait()
> /* assign skb_data->wait but too late */
How will we receive tx completion before TX kick off?
(see the original code below)
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> index 438930b65631..1efe4bb09262 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/core.c
> @@ -1094,22 +1094,13 @@ int rtw89_core_tx_kick_off_and_wait(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, struct sk_buff *sk
> int qsel, unsigned int timeout)
> {
> struct rtw89_tx_skb_data *skb_data = RTW89_TX_SKB_CB(skb);
> - struct rtw89_tx_wait_info *wait;
> + struct rtw89_tx_wait_info *wait = wiphy_dereference(rtwdev->hw->wiphy,
> + skb_data->wait);
Can't we just pass 'wait' by function argument?
> unsigned long time_left;
> int ret = 0;
>
> lockdep_assert_wiphy(rtwdev->hw->wiphy);
>
> - wait = kzalloc(sizeof(*wait), GFP_KERNEL);
> - if (!wait) {
> - rtw89_core_tx_kick_off(rtwdev, qsel);
> - return 0;
> - }
> -
> - init_completion(&wait->completion);
> - wait->skb = skb;
> - rcu_assign_pointer(skb_data->wait, wait);
> -
Here, original code prepares completion before TX kick off. How it could
be a problem? Do I miss something?
> rtw89_core_tx_kick_off(rtwdev, qsel);
> time_left = wait_for_completion_timeout(&wait->completion,
> msecs_to_jiffies(timeout));
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-18 5:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-17 9:52 [PATCH rtw v4 0/4] wifi: fixes for rtw89 Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-17 9:52 ` [PATCH rtw v4 1/4] wifi: rtw89: fix use-after-free in rtw89_core_tx_kick_off_and_wait() Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-18 4:00 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-18 4:40 ` Zong-Zhe Yang
2025-09-18 5:23 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-18 13:34 ` Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-19 0:27 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-17 9:52 ` [PATCH rtw v4 2/4] wifi: rtw89: fix tx_wait initialization race Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-18 5:47 ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2025-09-18 15:19 ` Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-19 0:34 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-19 0:50 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-19 7:46 ` Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-17 9:52 ` [PATCH rtw v4 3/4] wifi: rtw89: fix leak in rtw89_core_send_nullfunc() Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-18 5:48 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-17 9:52 ` [PATCH rtw v4 4/4] wifi: rtw89: avoid circular locking dependency in ser_state_run() Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-18 5:52 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-18 15:30 ` Fedor Pchelkin
2025-09-19 0:46 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2025-09-19 11:00 ` Fedor Pchelkin
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=08b25263c6874a089e4a271cb95a9cb7@realtek.com \
--to=pkshih@realtek.com \
--cc=kevin_yang@realtek.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lvc-project@linuxtesting.org \
--cc=pchelkin@ispras.ru \
--cc=phhuang@realtek.com \
--cc=rtl8821cerfe2@gmail.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.