From: Miaoqing Pan <quic_miaoqing@quicinc.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>, Baochen Qiang <quic_bqiang@quicinc.com>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@kernel.org>,
Jeff Johnson <jjohnson@kernel.org>,
<linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, <ath11k@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] wifi: ath11k: fix dest ring-buffer corruption
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 13:32:08 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7025db40-dda0-4cbb-80bd-09bd590584da@quicinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <01634993-80b1-496e-8453-e94b2efe658c@quicinc.com>
On 6/4/2025 10:34 AM, Miaoqing Pan wrote:
>
>
> On 6/3/2025 7:51 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 06:52:37PM +0800, Baochen Qiang wrote:
>>> On 6/2/2025 4:03 PM, Johan Hovold wrote:
>>
>>>> No, the barrier is needed between reading the head pointer and
>>>> accessing
>>>> descriptor fields, that's what matters.
>>>>
>>>> You can still end up with reading stale descriptor data even when
>>>> ath11k_hal_srng_dst_get_next_entry() returns non-NULL due to
>>>> speculation
>>>> (that's what happens on the X13s).
>>>
>>> The fact is that a dma_rmb() does not even prevent speculation, no
>>> matter where it is
>>> placed, right?
>>
>> It prevents the speculated load from being used.
>>
>>> If so the whole point of dma_rmb() is to prevent from compiler
>>> reordering
>>> or CPU reordering, but is it really possible?
>>>
>>> The sequence is
>>>
>>> 1# reading HP
>>> srng->u.dst_ring.cached_hp = READ_ONCE(*srng-
>>> >u.dst_ring.hp_addr);
>>>
>>> 2# validate HP
>>> if (srng->u.dst_ring.tp == srng->u.dst_ring.cached_hp)
>>> return NULL;
>>>
>>> 3# get desc
>>> desc = srng->ring_base_vaddr + srng->u.dst_ring.tp;
>>>
>>> 4# accessing desc
>>> ath11k_hal_desc_reo_parse_err(... desc, ...)
>>>
>>> Clearly each step depends on the results of previous steps. In this
>>> case the compiler/CPU
>>> is expected to be smart enough to not do any reordering, isn't it?
>>
>> Steps 3 and 4 can be done speculatively before the load in step 1 is
>> complete as long as the result is discarded if it turns out not to be
>> needed.
>>
>
> If the condition in step 2 is true and step 3 speculatively loads
> descriptor from TP before step 1, could this cause issues?
Sorry for typo, if the condition in step 2 is false and step 3
speculatively loads descriptor from TP before step 1, could this cause
issues?
>
> We previously had extensive discussions on this topic in the https://
> lore.kernel.org/linux-wireless/ecfe850c-b263-4bee-b888-
> c34178e690fc@quicinc.com/ thread. On my platform, dma_rmb() did not work
> as expected. The issue only disappeared after disabling PCIe endpoint
> relaxed ordering in firmware side. So it seems that HP was updated
> (Memory write) before descriptor (Memory write), which led to the problem.
>
>
>
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-06-04 5:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-26 11:48 [PATCH 0/3] " Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 1/3] " Johan Hovold
2025-05-29 7:03 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-02 8:03 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-03 10:52 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-03 11:51 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 2:16 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-04 6:59 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-05 8:16 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-04 2:34 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 5:32 ` Miaoqing Pan [this message]
2025-06-04 7:06 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 7:57 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 8:07 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-04 8:18 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-04 16:24 ` Jeff Johnson
2025-06-05 4:01 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-05 10:17 ` Johan Hovold
2025-06-05 10:54 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-06 0:52 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-06 2:02 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-06 7:43 ` Miaoqing Pan
2025-06-25 2:06 ` Baochen Qiang
2025-06-25 9:34 ` Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 2/3] wifi: ath11k: use plain access for descriptor length Johan Hovold
2025-05-26 11:48 ` [PATCH 3/3] wifi: ath11k: use plain accesses for monitor descriptor Johan Hovold
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7025db40-dda0-4cbb-80bd-09bd590584da@quicinc.com \
--to=quic_miaoqing@quicinc.com \
--cc=ath11k@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=jjohnson@kernel.org \
--cc=johan+linaro@kernel.org \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=quic_bqiang@quicinc.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®