[lvc-project] [PATCH rtw v4 1/4] wifi: rtw89: fix use-after-free in rtw89_core_tx_kick_off_and_wait()
Ping-Ke Shih
pkshih at realtek.com
Thu Sep 18 07:00:09 MSK 2025
Fedor Pchelkin <pchelkin at ispras.ru> wrote:
[...]
> @@ -6181,6 +6187,27 @@ rtw89_assoc_link_rcu_dereference(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, u8 macid)
> list_first_entry_or_null(&p->dlink_pool, typeof(*p->links_inst), dlink_schd); \
> })
>
> +static inline void rtw89_tx_wait_release(struct rtw89_tx_wait_info *wait)
> +{
> + dev_kfree_skb_any(wait->skb);
> + kfree_rcu(wait, rcu_head);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void rtw89_tx_wait_list_clear(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev)
> +{
> + struct rtw89_tx_wait_info *wait, *tmp;
> +
> + lockdep_assert_wiphy(rtwdev->hw->wiphy);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(wait, tmp, &rtwdev->tx_waits, list) {
> + if (!wait_for_completion_timeout(&wait->completion,
> + RTW89_TX_WAIT_DEFAULT_TIMEOUT))
> + continue;
Why should we wait 10ms? Just try_wait_for_completion()?
Since TX completion might be missing (rtw89_core_stop(), for example),
shouldn't we unconditionally free all in wait list for that case?
> + list_del(&wait->list);
> + rtw89_tx_wait_release(wait);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static inline int rtw89_hci_tx_write(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev,
> struct rtw89_core_tx_request *tx_req)
> {
More information about the lvc-project
mailing list