* iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb
@ 2008-10-09 9:04 Johannes Berg
2008-10-10 12:20 ` Tomas Winkler
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2008-10-09 9:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tomas Winkler; +Cc: linux-wireless
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 183 bytes --]
When iwl_txq_update_write_ptr fails, you have a huge problem: the skb is
linked on the queue, the write_ptr has been incremented, but you pretend
you can just free it.
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb
2008-10-09 9:04 iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb Johannes Berg
@ 2008-10-10 12:20 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-10-10 13:27 ` Johannes Berg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Winkler @ 2008-10-10 12:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Berg; +Cc: linux-wireless
On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> When iwl_txq_update_write_ptr fails, you have a huge problem: the skb is
> linked on the queue, the write_ptr has been incremented, but you pretend
> you can just free it.
It's not freed it's should be picket in the next round. We should
really return success to mac80211 in case
HW is not awake which is only sound reason it will fail.
Thanks
Tomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb
2008-10-10 12:20 ` Tomas Winkler
@ 2008-10-10 13:27 ` Johannes Berg
2008-10-10 14:36 ` Tomas Winkler
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Johannes Berg @ 2008-10-10 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Tomas Winkler; +Cc: linux-wireless
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 632 bytes --]
On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 14:20 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Johannes Berg
> <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> > When iwl_txq_update_write_ptr fails, you have a huge problem: the skb is
> > linked on the queue, the write_ptr has been incremented, but you pretend
> > you can just free it.
>
> It's not freed it's should be picket in the next round. We should
> really return success to mac80211 in case
No, it _is_ freed, by the caller, because you always return success to
mac80211 anyway and kfree the skb before. And if you didn't return
success it'd be just as wrong.
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb
2008-10-10 13:27 ` Johannes Berg
@ 2008-10-10 14:36 ` Tomas Winkler
0 siblings, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Tomas Winkler @ 2008-10-10 14:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Berg; +Cc: linux-wireless
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 3:27 PM, Johannes Berg
<johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-10-10 at 14:20 +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote:
>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:04 AM, Johannes Berg
>> <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>> > When iwl_txq_update_write_ptr fails, you have a huge problem: the skb is
>> > linked on the queue, the write_ptr has been incremented, but you pretend
>> > you can just free it.
>>
>> It's not freed it's should be picket in the next round. We should
>> really return success to mac80211 in case
>
> No, it _is_ freed, by the caller, because you always return success to
> mac80211 anyway and kfree the skb before. And if you didn't return
> success it'd be just as wrong.
Yes I know, as I said we should return success there.
Tomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-10-10 14:36 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-10-09 9:04 iwlwifi: bug in iwl_tx_skb Johannes Berg
2008-10-10 12:20 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-10-10 13:27 ` Johannes Berg
2008-10-10 14:36 ` Tomas Winkler
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox