[PATCH v3 2/2] wifi: ath11k: add srng->lock for ath11k_hal_srng_* in monitor mode

[Kang Yang]

On 12/13/2024 2:17 PM, Kang Yang wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/12/2024 10:53 PM, Kalle Valo wrote:
>> Kang Yang <quic_kangyang at quicinc.com> writes:
>>
>>> ath11k_hal_srng_* should be used with srng->lock to protect srng data.
>>>
>>> For ath11k_dp_rx_mon_dest_process() and ath11k_dp_full_mon_process_rx(),
>>> they use ath11k_hal_srng_* for many times but never call srng->lock.
>>>
>>> So when running (full) monitor mode, warning will occur:
>>> RIP: 0010:ath11k_hal_srng_dst_peek+0x18/0x30 [ath11k]
>>> Call Trace:
>>>   ? ath11k_hal_srng_dst_peek+0x18/0x30 [ath11k]
>>>   ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_status+0xc45/0x1190 [ath11k]
>>>   ? idr_alloc_u32+0x97/0xd0
>>>   ath11k_dp_rx_process_mon_rings+0x32a/0x550 [ath11k]
>>>   ath11k_dp_service_srng+0x289/0x5a0 [ath11k]
>>>   ath11k_pcic_ext_grp_napi_poll+0x30/0xd0 [ath11k]
>>>   __napi_poll+0x30/0x1f0
>>>   net_rx_action+0x198/0x320
>>>   __do_softirq+0xdd/0x319
>>>
>>> So add srng->lock for them to avoid such warnings.
>>>
>>> Tested-on: WCN6855 hw2.0 PCI WLAN.HSP.1.1-03125- 
>>> QCAHSPSWPL_V1_V2_SILICONZ_LITE-3.6510.30
>>> Tested-on: QCN9074 hw1.0 PCI WLAN.HK.2.7.0.1-01744-QCAHKSWPL_SILICONZ-1
>>>
>>> Fixes: d5c65159f289 ("ath11k: driver for Qualcomm IEEE 802.11ax 
>>> devices")
>>> Signed-off-by: Kang Yang <quic_kangyang at quicinc.com>
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>> @@ -5607,7 +5609,7 @@ static int ath11k_dp_full_mon_process_rx(struct 
>>> ath11k_base *ab, int mac_id,
>>>       struct hal_sw_mon_ring_entries *sw_mon_entries;
>>>       struct ath11k_pdev_mon_stats *rx_mon_stats;
>>>       struct sk_buff *head_msdu, *tail_msdu;
>>> -    void *mon_dst_srng = &ar->ab->hal.srng_list[dp- 
>>> >rxdma_mon_dst_ring.ring_id];
>>> +    struct hal_srng *mon_dst_srng;
>>>       void *ring_entry;
>>>       u32 rx_bufs_used = 0, mpdu_rx_bufs_used;
>>>       int quota = 0, ret;
>>> @@ -5623,6 +5625,9 @@ static int ath11k_dp_full_mon_process_rx(struct 
>>> ath11k_base *ab, int mac_id,
>>>           goto reap_status_ring;
>>>       }
>>> +    mon_dst_srng = &ar->ab->hal.srng_list[dp- 
>>> >rxdma_mon_dst_ring.ring_id];
>>> +    spin_lock_bh(&mon_dst_srng->lock);
>>
>> Why initialise mon_dst_srng differently? The commit message mentions
>> nothing about this change.
> 
> 
> Because need to fetch spin lock inside 'struct hal_srng'. If still use 
> 'void *mon_dst_srng', need to perform a variable type cast.
> 
> Bur 'struct hal_srng' will make this line too long:
> 'struct hal_srng *mon_dst_srng = &ar->ab->hal.srng_list[dp- 
>  >rxdma_mon_dst_ring.ring_id];'
> So I separated the definition and initialization.
> 
> ath11k_dp_rx_reap_mon_status_ring()/ath11k_dp_process_rx and others ring 
> process function is the same.
> 

Do i need to send a new version for this?

> 
> 
>>
> 
>