Return-path: Received: from mail.candelatech.com ([208.74.158.172]:42312 "EHLO ns3.lanforge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751007Ab3FQVbu (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Jun 2013 17:31:50 -0400 Message-ID: <51BF8040.2000408@candelatech.com> (sfid-20130617_233153_299640_BDB1764F) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 14:31:44 -0700 From: Ben Greear MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Lots of confusion on bss refcounting. References: <51BF5A53.8050100@candelatech.com> (sfid-20130617_205007_448068_E9E81DD2) <1371495758.8168.3.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <51BF5ED4.9010704@candelatech.com> In-Reply-To: <51BF5ED4.9010704@candelatech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/17/2013 12:09 PM, Ben Greear wrote: > On 06/17/2013 12:02 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > The bss reference is passed back, and through luck or careful programming, > it *seems* that all paths related to calling ieee80211_rx_mgmt_assoc_resp > managed to consume the bss. > > I haven't figured out yet why this is not an erroneous put since I didn't > find the reference taken in the first place. > > I'm going to work on making some changes to the ref counting scheme > a bit. I'd rather have the code perhaps take and put a few refs > it might otherwise skip to keep the ownership cleaner and make > the code easier to debug and understand... > > I'll post some for RFC when I make some progress. I think I found at least some of the leaks. In places like ieee80211_mgd_stop, we were calling ieee80211_destroy_assoc_data, but it was not putting the bss reference. I'll post some RFC patches in a minute or two...first is debugging logic, second attempts to fix bss ref counting. This needs more testing before it is applied...we will continue testing it.... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com