iwlwifi: mvm: use the PROBE_RESP_QUEUE to send deauth to unknown station - net-next.git

diff options

author	Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com>	2016-12-28 10:43:02 +0200
committer	Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>	2017-02-08 12:55:32 +0200
commit	d45cb20e123c5d7d6cd56301bc98f0bfd725cd77 (patch)
tree	766b13ac89349a548c6725d4e1b63ec94b587aca /include/sound
parent	5351f9ab254c30d41659924265f1ecd7b4758d9e (diff)

iwlwifi: mvm: use the PROBE_RESP_QUEUE to send deauth to unknown station

When we send a deauth to a station we don't know about, we need to use the PROBE_RESP queue. This can happen when we send a deauth to a station that is not associated to us. Signed-off-by: Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@intel.com>

Diffstat (limited to 'include/sound')

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions

/www.iagoabal.eu/eba/) reported the following double-lock bug: Double lock: 1. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at pl330_free_chan_resources:2236; 2. call to function `pl330_release_channel' immediately after; 3. call to function `dma_pl330_rqcb' in line 1753; 4. spin_lock_irqsave(pch->lock, flags) at dma_pl330_rqcb:1505. I have fixed it as suggested by Marek Szyprowski. First, I have replaced `pch->lock' with `pl330->lock' in functions `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' and `pl330_free_chan_resources'. This avoids the double-lock by acquiring a different lock than `dma_pl330_rqcb'. NOTE that, as a result, `pl330_free_chan_resources' executes `list_splice_tail_init' on `pch->work_list' under lock `pl330->lock', whereas in the rest of the code `pch->work_list' is protected by `pch->lock'. I don't know if this may cause race conditions. Similarly `pch->cyclic' is written by `pl330_alloc_chan_resources' under `pl330->lock' but read by `pl330_tx_submit' under `pch->lock'. Second, I have removed locking from `pl330_request_channel' and `pl330_release_channel' functions. Function `pl330_request_channel' is only called from `pl330_alloc_chan_resources', so the lock is already held. Function `pl330_release_channel' is called from `pl330_free_chan_resources', which already holds the lock, and from `pl330_del'. Function `pl330_del' is called in an error path of `pl330_probe' and at the end of `pl330_remove', but I assume that there cannot be concurrent accesses to the protected data at those points. Signed-off-by: Iago Abal <mail@iagoabal.eu> Reviewed-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@samsung.com> Signed-off-by: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>

Diffstat (limited to 'tools/testing/selftests/nsfs')


context:
space:
mode: