Subject: Re: Potential issue in ieee80211_rx_handlers_result related to
 link_sta?
From:   Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To:     "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>
References: <88c16925-225c-c68c-6121-c3a2c08535a0@candelatech.com>
Organization: Candela Technologies
Message-ID: <995cf1cc-2cb1-92a5-19c4-b7ef40c37ff9@candelatech.com>
Date:   Tue, 21 Feb 2023 21:16:50 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <88c16925-225c-c68c-6121-c3a2c08535a0@candelatech.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-MW
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

On 2/21/23 4:10 PM, Ben Greear wrote:
> I'm working to rebase my patches on the 6.2 kernel.
> 
> I am currently tracking down something I did that causes the code to crash in the code below
> right above 'fallthrough'.  I'm wondering why it is checking for rx->sta but then access
> ing rx->link_sta?
> 
> static void ieee80211_rx_handlers_result(struct ieee80211_rx_data *rx,
>                       ieee80211_rx_result res)
> {
>      switch (res) {
>      case RX_DROP_MONITOR:
>          I802_DEBUG_INC(rx->sdata->local->rx_handlers_drop);
>          if (rx->sta)
>              rx->link_sta->rx_stats.dropped++;
>          fallthrough;

I found my bug, hash fast path wasn't setting up the link_sta.

Still, the checks might be better changed?

Thanks,
Ben

> 
> Thanks,
> Ben
>