lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2017 18:32:16 +0100
From:   "Luis R. Rodriguez" <>
To:     "Grumbach, Emmanuel" <>
Cc:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <>,
        "Berg, Johannes" <>,
        "Coelho, Luciano" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>,
        linuxwifi <>,
        "" <>,
        "" <>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/5] iwlwifi: fix drv cleanup on opmode registration failure

On Sun, Feb 19, 2017 at 09:16:01AM +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
> > This should in theory fix a detangled drv from the drv list should either of the
> > opmode modules loaded and handled registration for the drv.
> > 
> > The path of having the opmode registration deal with the drv opmode start is
> > actually the more common path. The other path, from the async callback is
> > rathe rare (1/8 or so times for me) -- it happens when the the opmode
> > driver's init routine completed prior to the driver's async callback opmode
> > start call.
> I'd claim it should never happen unless you have several devices on the system using the same
> opmode, or unless you do:
> modprobe iwlwifi  #which will load iwl{d,m}vm
> rmmod iwl{d,m}vm #and do _not_ remove iwlwifi
> modprobe iwlwifi

That is indeed one way one can easily reproduce this. There are however other
ways too. Try a loop of

modprobe -r iwlmvm (which removes iwlwifi) followed by modprobe iwlmvm;

while this check for which path is taken, or better yet check if the
list of drvs is empty on opmode registration. Every now and then I see
the list is empty.

I have a feeling this is then also a rare rarely observed by your QA team
as well, so this code then is also stitching together a set of sequence
calls for both paths.

> > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <>
> > ---
> Luca is OOO,  but this looks fine to me.

Reviewed-by ?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists