[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F5D7D47.102@qca.qualcomm.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Mar 2012 10:06:23 +0530
From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <mohammed@....qualcomm.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
CC: Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<stable@...r.kernel.org>, Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [ 08/12] mac80211: zero initialize count field in ieee80211_tx_rate
Hi Ben,
On Monday 12 March 2012 07:27 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 01:20 +0100, Willy Tarreau wrote:
>> 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<mohammed@....qualcomm.com>
>>
>> commit 8617b093d0031837a7be9b32bc674580cfb5f6b5 upstream.
>>
>> rate control algorithms concludes the rate as invalid
>> with rate[i].idx< -1 , while they do also check for rate[i].count is
>> non-zero. it would be safer to zero initialize the 'count' field.
>> recently we had a ath9k rate control crash where the ath9k rate control
>> in ath_tx_status assumed to check only for rate[i].count being non-zero
>> in one instance and ended up in using invalid rate index for
>> 'connection monitoring NULL func frames' which eventually lead to the crash.
>> thanks to Pavel Roskin for fixing it and finding the root cause.
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=768639
>
> In 2.6.32, ath_tx_status() checks that rates[i].idx>= 0, so it properly
> ignores these dummy entries. Further, there is code further down the
> rate_control_get_rate() function that sets .idx only and appears to
> depend on the initialisation of .count = 1.
>
> So I'm pretty sure this patch is wrong for 2.6.32; it could be
> backported but I don't think the change is necessary anyway.
true, but i think its better to initialize the count = 0 rather than
count = 1, though the older version driver checks for rate[i].idx >= 0
in ath_rc_tx_status. while the ath_tx_status has no such iteration in
the older driver code.
>
> Ben.
>
>> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: Pavel Roskin<proski@....org>
>> Signed-off-by: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<mohammed@....qualcomm.com>
>> Signed-off-by: John W. Linville<linville@...driver.com>
>>
>> diff --git a/net/mac80211/rate.c b/net/mac80211/rate.c
>> index ad64f4d..f9b8e81 100644
>> --- a/net/mac80211/rate.c
>> +++ b/net/mac80211/rate.c
>> @@ -344,7 +344,7 @@ void rate_control_get_rate(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata,
>> for (i = 0; i< IEEE80211_TX_MAX_RATES; i++) {
>> info->control.rates[i].idx = -1;
>> info->control.rates[i].flags = 0;
>> - info->control.rates[i].count = 1;
>> + info->control.rates[i].count = 0;
>> }
>>
>> if (sdata->local->hw.flags& IEEE80211_HW_HAS_RATE_CONTROL)
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>>
>
--
thanks,
shafi
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists