Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <c304ad9c-f404-d22e-de74-9398da3ebfc3@hauke-m.de>
 <CAFA6WYN3FbqTivGJTfXtHsMjXNPXW+P4MZWiCL14utF2sHkeYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <885ae3bffad315445be3fc70cccade9067ee6937.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <CAFA6WYMYQAnW0vKm4fxNn+nA6dYXvqaungBEYDpd-wrzaavr8A@mail.gmail.com> <42e9ac2651c677e9143b019393d60c3254893ae0.camel@sipsolutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <42e9ac2651c677e9143b019393d60c3254893ae0.camel@sipsolutions.net>
From:   Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 23 Apr 2020 15:06:09 +0530
Message-ID: <CAFA6WYN5STtNPK+TJF_SwqSfO6sj8mwaJZ2zSno=pmSv2bbmdw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Commit "mac80211: fix race in ieee80211_register_hw()" breaks
 mac80211 debugfs
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc:     Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@hauke-m.de>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>, stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, 23 Apr 2020 at 14:29, Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 2020-04-23 at 14:27 +0530, Sumit Garg wrote:
>
> > > > +++ b/net/wireless/core.c
> > > > @@ -473,6 +473,10 @@ struct wiphy *wiphy_new_nm(const struct
> > > > cfg80211_ops *ops, int sizeof_priv,
> > > >                 }
> > > >         }
> > > >
> > > > +       /* add to debugfs */
> > > > +       rdev->wiphy.debugfsdir = debugfs_create_dir(wiphy_name(&rdev->wiphy),
> > > > +                                                   ieee80211_debugfs_dir);
> > >
> > > This cannot work, we haven't committed to the name of the wiphy yet at
> > > this point.
> >
> > Maybe I am missing something, can you please elaborate here?
> >
> > Looking at the code, the default or requested wiphy name is configured
> > just above this and the rename API "cfg80211_dev_rename()" takes care
> > of renaming wiphy debugfs directory too.
>
> Yes, but I think wiphy_register() can still fail at this point, due to
> name clashes or so?
>
> In any case, it'd be very strange to have a debugfs entry around when
> the wiphy doesn't exist yet, and could possibly cause the same issue
> that you fixed again, just through debugfs accesses?
>

Now I understood your point. Yeah it's definitely better to expose
debugfs after the wiphy device is registered.

> Can you take a look at the patch I sent?

Sure I will take a look.

-Sumit

>
> johannes
>