From: Miaoqing Pan <quic_miaoqing@quicinc.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Baochen Qiang <quic_bqiang@quicinc.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>,
Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@kernel.org>,
<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, <ath11k@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] wifi: ath11k: fix dest ring-buffer corruption
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 10:34:00 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01634993-80b1-496e-8453-e94b2efe658c@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aD7h0OOoGjVm8pDK@hovoldconsulting.com>
On 6/3/2025 7:51 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:52:37PM +0800, Baochen Qiang wrote:
>> On 6/2/2025 4:03 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>
>>> No, the barrier is needed between reading the head pointer and accessing
>>> descriptor fields, that's what matters.
>>>
>>> You can still end up with reading stale descriptor data even when
>>> ath11k_hal_srng_dst_get_next_entry() returns non-NULL due to speculation
>>> (that's what happens on the X13s).
>>
>> The fact is that a dma_rmb() does not even prevent speculation, no matter where it is
>> placed, right?
>
> It prevents the speculated load from being used.
>
>> If so the whole point of dma_rmb() is to prevent from compiler reordering
>> or CPU reordering, but is it really possible?
>>
>> The sequence is
>>
>> 1# reading HP
>> srng->u.dst_ring.cached_hp = READ_ONCE(*srng->u.dst_ring.hp_addr);
>>
>> 2# validate HP
>> if (srng->u.dst_ring.tp == srng->u.dst_ring.cached_hp)
>> return NULL;
>>
>> 3# get desc
>> desc = srng->ring_base_vaddr + srng->u.dst_ring.tp;
>>
>> 4# accessing desc
>> ath11k_hal_desc_reo_parse_err(... desc, ...)
>>
>> Clearly each step depends on the results of previous steps. In this case the compiler/CPU
>> is expected to be smart enough to not do any reordering, isn't it?
>
> Steps 3 and 4 can be done speculatively before the load in step 1 is
> complete as long as the result is discarded if it turns out not to be
> needed.
>
If the condition in step 2 is true and step 3 speculatively loads
descriptor from TP before step 1, could this cause issues?
We previously had extensive discussions on this topic in the
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/ecfe850c-b263-4bee-b888-c34178e690fc@quicinc.com/
thread. On my platform, dma_rmb() did not work as expected. The issue
only disappeared after disabling PCIe endpoint relaxed ordering in
firmware side. So it seems that HP was updated (Memory write) before
descriptor (Memory write), which led to the problem.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-04 3:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-26 11:48 [PATCH 0/3] wifi: ath11k: fix dest ring-buffer corruption Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Johan Hovold
2025-05-29 7:03 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-02 8:03 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-03 10:52 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-03 11:51 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 2:16 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-04 6:59 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-05 8:16 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-04 2:34 ` Miaoqing Pan [this message]
2025-06-04 5:32 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 7:06 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 7:57 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 8:07 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 8:18 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 16:24 ` Jeff Johnson
2025-06-05 4:01 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-05 10:17 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-05 10:54 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-06 0:52 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-06 2:02 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-06 7:43 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-25 2:06 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-25 9:34 ` Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] wifi: ath11k: use plain access for descriptor length Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] wifi: ath11k: use plain accesses for monitor descriptor Johan Hovold
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=01634993-80b1-496e-8453-e94b2efe658c@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_miaoqing@quicinc.com \
--cc=ath11k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=jjohnson@kernel.org \
--cc=johan+linaro@kernel.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quic_bqiang@quicinc.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox