diff mbox

[4.9] brcmfmac: use correct skb freeing helper when deleting flowring

Message ID 20160927091428.19223-1-zajec5@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: Kalle Valo
Headers show

Commit Message

Rafał Miłecki Sept. 27, 2016, 9:14 a.m. UTC
From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>

Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
that will check for 802.1x type as well.

Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.

Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
---
Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.

I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
---
 drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c | 9 ++++++++-
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Comments

Arend van Spriel Sept. 27, 2016, 10:05 a.m. UTC | #1
On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> 
> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
> 
> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.

Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
> ---
> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
> 
> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.

Please mark it for stable as well.

> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c | 9 ++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
> index b16b367..d0b738d 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
> @@ -234,13 +234,20 @@ static void brcmf_flowring_block(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid,
>  
>  void brcmf_flowring_delete(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid)
>  {
> +	struct brcmf_bus *bus_if = dev_get_drvdata(flow->dev);
>  	struct brcmf_flowring_ring *ring;
> +	struct brcmf_if *ifp;
>  	u16 hash_idx;
> +	u8 ifidx;
>  	struct sk_buff *skb;
>  
>  	ring = flow->rings[flowid];
>  	if (!ring)
>  		return;
> +
> +	ifidx = brcmf_flowring_ifidx_get(flow, flowid);
> +	ifp = brcmf_get_ifp(bus_if->drvr, ifidx);
> +
>  	brcmf_flowring_block(flow, flowid, false);
>  	hash_idx = ring->hash_id;
>  	flow->hash[hash_idx].ifidx = BRCMF_FLOWRING_INVALID_IFIDX;

I am not very familiar with flowring code, but I suppose this is just
initializing the entry for later use, right?

> @@ -249,7 +256,7 @@ void brcmf_flowring_delete(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid)
>  
>  	skb = skb_dequeue(&ring->skblist);
>  	while (skb) {
> -		brcmu_pkt_buf_free_skb(skb);
> +		brcmf_txfinalize(ifp, skb, false);
>  		skb = skb_dequeue(&ring->skblist);
>  	}
>  
>
Kalle Valo Sept. 27, 2016, 11:27 a.m. UTC | #2
Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:

> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>> 
>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>> 
>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>
> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>> ---
>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>> 
>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.

Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.

> Please mark it for stable as well.

I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
go to?
Arend van Spriel Sept. 27, 2016, 11:33 a.m. UTC | #3
On 27-9-2016 13:27, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
> 
>> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>
>>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>>>
>>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>>
>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>> ---
>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>
>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
> 
> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
> 
>> Please mark it for stable as well.
> 
> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
> go to?

Not sure if the vendor directory move causes issues as stable can not
fallback to three-way merge. I assumed it would so my last stable tag
was only for 4.7 and I took care of older kernels at later time with
backported patch. I can do that for this one as well.

Regards,
Arend
Rafał Miłecki Sept. 27, 2016, 11:44 a.m. UTC | #4
On 27 September 2016 at 13:27, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>
>> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>
>>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>>>
>>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>>
>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>> ---
>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>
>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
>
> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
>
>> Please mark it for stable as well.
>
> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
> go to?

I was analyzing this.
1) This patch uses brcmf_get_ifp which is available in 4.4+ only.
2) It applies cleanly to 4.5+ only due to 32f90caa7debd ("brcmfmac:
Increase nr of supported flowrings.")
3) 4.4 would also require applying to the patch without broadcom/ subdir

That said I suggest 4.5+. Any objections?
Rafał Miłecki Sept. 27, 2016, 11:58 a.m. UTC | #5
On 27 September 2016 at 13:44, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 27 September 2016 at 13:27, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>
>>>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>>>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>>>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>>>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>>>>
>>>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>>>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>>>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>> ---
>>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
>>
>> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
>>
>>> Please mark it for stable as well.
>>
>> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
>> go to?
>
> I was analyzing this.
> 1) This patch uses brcmf_get_ifp which is available in 4.4+ only.
> 2) It applies cleanly to 4.5+ only due to 32f90caa7debd ("brcmfmac:
> Increase nr of supported flowrings.")
> 3) 4.4 would also require applying to the patch without broadcom/ subdir
>
> That said I suggest 4.5+. Any objections?

Let me see if patchwork with pick Cc tag as it does for others.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.5+

This may be worth backporting to 4.4 as well (as it's longterm), but
I'll do it separately due to patch not applying cleanly.
Arend van Spriel Sept. 27, 2016, 12:04 p.m. UTC | #6
On 27-9-2016 13:58, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 27 September 2016 at 13:44, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 27 September 2016 at 13:27, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>>
>>>>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>>>>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>>>>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>>>>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>>>>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>>>>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
>>>
>>> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
>>>
>>>> Please mark it for stable as well.
>>>
>>> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
>>> go to?
>>
>> I was analyzing this.
>> 1) This patch uses brcmf_get_ifp which is available in 4.4+ only.
>> 2) It applies cleanly to 4.5+ only due to 32f90caa7debd ("brcmfmac:
>> Increase nr of supported flowrings.")
>> 3) 4.4 would also require applying to the patch without broadcom/ subdir
>>
>> That said I suggest 4.5+. Any objections?

No objections. Just a tip. I tend to look at kernel.org main page to see
the stable and long-term kernel listed. So 4.7+ and 4.5+ have same
meaning as 4.5 and 4.6 are not stable/long-term kernels.

Regards,
Arend

> Let me see if patchwork with pick Cc tag as it does for others.
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.5+
> 
> This may be worth backporting to 4.4 as well (as it's longterm), but
> I'll do it separately due to patch not applying cleanly.
Rafał Miłecki Sept. 27, 2016, 12:07 p.m. UTC | #7
On 27 September 2016 at 14:04, Arend Van Spriel
<arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> wrote:
> On 27-9-2016 13:58, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> On 27 September 2016 at 13:44, Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 27 September 2016 at 13:27, Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org> wrote:
>>>> Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 27-9-2016 11:14, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>>>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Flowrings contain skbs waiting for transmission that were passed to us
>>>>>> by netif. It means we checked every one of them looking for 802.1x
>>>>>> Ethernet type. When deleting flowring we have to use freeing function
>>>>>> that will check for 802.1x type as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Freeing skbs without a proper check was leading to counter not being
>>>>>> properly decreased. This was triggering a WARNING every time
>>>>>> brcmf_netdev_wait_pend8021x was called.
>>>>>
>>>>> Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>>>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>>>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
>>>>
>>>>> Please mark it for stable as well.
>>>>
>>>> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
>>>> go to?
>>>
>>> I was analyzing this.
>>> 1) This patch uses brcmf_get_ifp which is available in 4.4+ only.
>>> 2) It applies cleanly to 4.5+ only due to 32f90caa7debd ("brcmfmac:
>>> Increase nr of supported flowrings.")
>>> 3) 4.4 would also require applying to the patch without broadcom/ subdir
>>>
>>> That said I suggest 4.5+. Any objections?
>
> No objections. Just a tip. I tend to look at kernel.org main page to see
> the stable and long-term kernel listed. So 4.7+ and 4.5+ have same
> meaning as 4.5 and 4.6 are not stable/long-term kernels.

Some projects may work on their own stable kernels, e.g. Ubuntu, see:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Kernel/Dev/ExtendedStable

That's why I don't always look strictly at upstream stable releases only.
Kalle Valo Sept. 27, 2016, 12:08 p.m. UTC | #8
Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@gmail.com> writes:

>>>>> Kalle: this isn't important enough for 4.8 as it's too late for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to get it for 4.9 however, as this fixes bug that could lead
>>>>> to WARNING on every add_key/del_key call. We was struggling with these
>>>>> WARNINGs for some time and this fixes one of two problems causing them.
>>>
>>> Ok, I'll queue this for 4.9.
>>>
>>>> Please mark it for stable as well.
>>>
>>> I can add that. Any ideas how old releases stable releases should this
>>> go to?
>>
>> I was analyzing this.
>> 1) This patch uses brcmf_get_ifp which is available in 4.4+ only.
>> 2) It applies cleanly to 4.5+ only due to 32f90caa7debd ("brcmfmac:
>> Increase nr of supported flowrings.")
>> 3) 4.4 would also require applying to the patch without broadcom/ subdir
>>
>> That said I suggest 4.5+. Any objections?
>
> Let me see if patchwork with pick Cc tag as it does for others.
>
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.5+

An excellent idea but no luck:

Signed-off-by: Rafa? Mi?ecki <rafal@milecki.pl>
Acked-by: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>

I'll add this to my patchwork wishlist though, I think it would be a
really useful feature to have.

(The question marks are because of my buggy copy paste, ignore those)
diff mbox

Patch

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
index b16b367..d0b738d 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/flowring.c
@@ -234,13 +234,20 @@  static void brcmf_flowring_block(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid,
 
 void brcmf_flowring_delete(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid)
 {
+	struct brcmf_bus *bus_if = dev_get_drvdata(flow->dev);
 	struct brcmf_flowring_ring *ring;
+	struct brcmf_if *ifp;
 	u16 hash_idx;
+	u8 ifidx;
 	struct sk_buff *skb;
 
 	ring = flow->rings[flowid];
 	if (!ring)
 		return;
+
+	ifidx = brcmf_flowring_ifidx_get(flow, flowid);
+	ifp = brcmf_get_ifp(bus_if->drvr, ifidx);
+
 	brcmf_flowring_block(flow, flowid, false);
 	hash_idx = ring->hash_id;
 	flow->hash[hash_idx].ifidx = BRCMF_FLOWRING_INVALID_IFIDX;
@@ -249,7 +256,7 @@  void brcmf_flowring_delete(struct brcmf_flowring *flow, u16 flowid)
 
 	skb = skb_dequeue(&ring->skblist);
 	while (skb) {
-		brcmu_pkt_buf_free_skb(skb);
+		brcmf_txfinalize(ifp, skb, false);
 		skb = skb_dequeue(&ring->skblist);
 	}