From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.218.175.91 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793610354; b=cWEwMxuRc6R6OubZGr1TSS7q/PnR2um+EroBEzMOUGy13p4NdjN/By9QGPfMaVeNC0lC CWp2QtYkOto+V9zkeMvl0SmOEBdieicMQBcNwWCZQUlOxYf9f6BB7SCZxLYQWPYvN4bpT vmA/yNhArjt0aYdBB5ya1WrmxAKZ5B8F2si/qhdwoiS9LxTdi+9k2O0VIfwtLvgcIg3sk sugddv0TERG8rT/OUY9ftjIZjvf2TItFiOMXzP680IBLeyCwO7qxJd0Uj4H2raf0ikP65 +GFnvm4AXep0mfAwrcFMaFcHryLCmNdCxgbjWhE1+g6Un/zAqmtd5lzv6BoavoXpa2g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793610354; h=DMARC-Filter:X-Envelope-To:DKIM-Signature:X-Envelope-To:Received: X-Mizu-Trace-ID:X-Migadu-Flow:MIME-Version:Date:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From:Message-ID:TLS-Required:Subject:To:Cc: In-Reply-To:References; bh=hFAPZJU1NpNmffumzVrKY0D5GwTTfxtDmIvR2zKxyHg=; b=l2LYIRulI8QPe17hgF47WIQ8mbqU/42bhFvSwnUfDXR512WTQ27KHskm5F2rrAinwhLZ OebmFSR1WqXuUwVtc+Dc5fQwEeKyigWUzfAbGguaCKhgqARlWLbFa3Y3rlOlQJ0UXonRh LDn8Gdn953EgTafyf6xmThSTKNzN3/HmnzmWzFk8VIjG77R8m/a3eDY4BO8EZjbtZICeW plOdYGOVMI9HfLp19A3+fyHJsTXJqIdRQvVH4MO8eCRj7wYDzxkG7YXhUb4yEfQwym+1r kR4C33c5uID31GvvucDxs7Kl37vqP8TKbzbgoDzsx/jgW3vn/XRfJ/nAjui0PcVg3KA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=kduObnTZ; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=91.218.175.91 Received: from mta0.migadu.com (out-91.mta0.migadu.com [91.218.175.91]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE446606A324 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 09:05:52 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp.subspace.kernel.org DE446606A324 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key, unprotected) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=key1 header.b=kduObnTZ X-Envelope-To: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=rj84BJmdv3Gf/7Ce/0swnvMv4/NDNGaDGlbZ9duKzio=; c=simple/simple; d=linux.dev; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=key1; t=1793610350; v=1; x=1794215150; b=kduObnTZugcFIi/wvqpUp2ODHgqMRLXt7gh7nQtigrietFXW/5/oakv5D3p0Rls0HTKuV0N5 9U4BLtkjw+6sYySN0bRL3bhOUYM2toenkZl/pPPpqlyNKqazCnKx3fLd4ugFFGjlIf02jhpR/BJ EVm0+bsJFcnwyD9of2kLXnY8= X-Envelope-To: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Received: by smtp.migadu.com with ESMTPS id 45a05da21da06750; Mon, 02 Nov 2026 09:05:50 +0000 X-Mizu-Trace-ID: 45a05da21da06750 X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2026 09:05:50 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: "Luka Gejak" Message-ID: <89b76c1edf151f509a912f887d9fe0b93cc9e19c@linux.dev> TLS-Required: No Subject: Re: [PATCH rtw-next v2 2/2] wifi: rtw88: check the C2H payload length before reading it To: "Huihui Huang" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: "Huihui Huang" , "Ping-Ke Shih" In-Reply-To: <20261031175621.2228762-3-hhhuang@smu.edu.sg> References: <20261031175621.2228762-1-hhhuang@smu.edu.sg> <20261031175621.2228762-3-hhhuang@smu.edu.sg> Hi Huihui, Thanks for the v2. One comment below. October 31, 2026 at 6:56 PM, "Huihui Huang" wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c b/drivers/net/wire= less/realtek/rtw88/fw.c > index 0a909bf79cf5..6bc684726669 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/fw.c [ ... ] > @@ -2381,6 +2386,9 @@ void rtw_hw_scan_status_report(struct rtw_dev *rt= wdev, struct sk_buff *skb) > if (!test_bit(RTW_FLAG_SCANNING, rtwdev->flags)) > return; > > + if (rtw_c2h_payload_len(skb) < 3) > + return; > + As far as I can see, apart from the abort paths this report is the only thing that completes a hw scan. So, a short report now leaves the scan pending. RTW_FLAG_SCANNING stays set, scanning_vif is never cleared, and I couldn't find anything in rtw88 that times the scan out. Until something cancels it, e.g. a disconnect or the interface going down, every new scan then fails with -EBUSY, since the old request is still pending. Before this patch the scan still completed, only with a return code read past skb->len. Maybe it is better to complete it as aborted here instead of dropping the report, something like: if (rtw_c2h_payload_len(skb) < 3) { rtw_hw_scan_complete(rtwdev, vif, true); return; } Best regards, Luka Gejak