netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v1 3/7] rtw88: Use rtw_iterate_stas where the iterator reads or writes registers

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

Message-ID: <CAFBinCAzoPmtvH1Wn9dY4pFsERQ5N+0xXRG=UB1eEGe_qTf+6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 25 Jul 2021 23:51:09 +0200
From:   Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com>
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>, pkshih@...ltek.com
Cc:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, tony0620emma@...il.com,
        kvalo@...eaurora.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Neo Jou <neojou@...il.com>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v1 3/7] rtw88: Use rtw_iterate_stas where the iterator
 reads or writes registers

Hi Johannes, Hi Ping-Ke,

On Mon, Jul 19, 2021 at 8:36 AM Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2021-07-17 at 22:40 +0200, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/mac80211.c
> > @@ -721,7 +721,7 @@ static void rtw_ra_mask_info_update(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev,
> >       br_data.rtwdev = rtwdev;
> >       br_data.vif = vif;
> >       br_data.mask = mask;
> > -     rtw_iterate_stas_atomic(rtwdev, rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter, &br_data);
> > +     rtw_iterate_stas(rtwdev, rtw_ra_mask_info_update_iter, &br_data);
>
> And then you pretty much immediately break that invariant here, namely
> that you're calling this within the set_bitrate_mask() method called by
> mac80211.
you are right, I was not aware of this

> That's not actually fundamentally broken today, but it does *severely*
> restrict what we can do in mac80211 wrt. locking, and I really don't
> want to keep the dozen or so locks forever, this needs simplification
> because clearly we don't even know what should be under what lock.
To me it's also not clear what the goal of the whole locking is.
The lock in ieee80211_iterate_stations_atomic is obviously for the
mac80211-internal state-machine
But I *believe* that there's a second purpose (rtw88 specific) -
here's my understanding of that part:
- rtw_sta_info contains a "mac_id" which is an identifier for a
specific station used by the rtw88 driver and is shared with the
firmware
- rtw_ops_sta_{add,remove} uses rtwdev->mutex to protect the rtw88
side of this "mac_id" identifier
- (for some reason rtw_update_sta_info doesn't use rtwdev->mutex)

So now I am wondering if the ieee80211_iterate_stations_atomic lock is
also used to protect any modifications to rtw_sta_info.
Ping-Ke, I am wondering if the attached patch (untested - to better
demonstrate what I want to say) would:
- allow us to move the register write outside of
ieee80211_iterate_stations_atomic
- mean we can keep ieee80211_iterate_stations_atomic (instead of the
non-atomic variant)
- protect the code managing the "mac_id" with rtwdev->mutex consistently

> The other cases look OK, it's being called from outside contexts
> (wowlan, etc.)
Thanks for reviewing this Johannes!


Best regards,
Martin

View attachment "rtw_update_sta_info-outside-rtw_iterate_stas_atomic.patch" of type "text/x-patch" (1505 bytes)