linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: ath11k: move .max_tx_ring to struct ath11k_hw_hal

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <56c6471b-c878-4afd-8e8e-d56266ca9c64@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2026 12:30:06 +0530
From: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanthakumar.thiagarajan@....qualcomm.com>
To: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>, jjohnson@...nel.org,
        ath11k@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: baochen.qiang@....qualcomm.com, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: ath11k: move .max_tx_ring to struct
 ath11k_hw_hal_params



On 12/28/2025 8:44 PM, Alexandru Gagniuc wrote:
> ".max_tx_ring" is an upper bounds to indexing ".tcl2wbm_rbm_map". It
> is initialized in, core.c, a different file than the array. This
> spaghetti-like relation is fragile and not obvious. Accidentally
> setting ".max_tx_ring" too high leads to a hard to track out-of-
> bounds access and memory corruption.
> 
> There is a small ambiguity on the meaning of "max_tx_ring":
>   - The highest ring, max=3 implies there are 4 rings (0, 1, 2, 3)
>   - The highest number to use for array indexing (there are 3 rings)
> 
> Clarify this dependency by moving ".max_tx_ring" adjacent to the array
> ".tcl2wbm_rbm_map", and name it "num_tx_rings". Use ARRAY_SIZE()
> instead of #defines to initialize the length field.
> 
> The ath11k_hw_hal_params_qca6390 uses fewer num_tx_rings than its map,
> so use a constant to express the correct value. Add a static_assert()
> to fail compilation if the constant is accidentally set too high.

Text related to static_assert to be removed accordingly.

> 
> The intent is to make the code easier to understand rather than fix
> an existing bug.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexandru Gagniuc <mr.nuke.me@...il.com>

With the above minor comment addressed.

Reviewed-by: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanthakumar.thiagarajan@....qualcomm.com>