From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from wolverine01.qualcomm.com ([199.106.114.254]:29369 "EHLO wolverine01.qualcomm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753180AbdEDNIV (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 May 2017 09:08:21 -0400 From: Kalle Valo To: Steve deRosier CC: James Hughes , Arend Van Spriel , linux-wireless Subject: Re: ath6kl: assure headroom of skbuff is writable in .start_xmit() Date: Thu, 4 May 2017 13:08:17 +0000 Message-ID: <87o9v8rcqn.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20170504_150825_253969_82AB00B4) References: <1493111408-27692-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <20170426085337.181AA61493@smtp.codeaurora.org> <4d7ced43-4a95-f626-b66e-285c133c48c1@broadcom.com> In-Reply-To: (Steve deRosier's message of "Wed, 26 Apr 2017 21:55:48 -0700") Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Steve deRosier writes: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 12:54 PM, James Hughes > wrote: >> On 26 April 2017 at 19:03, Arend Van Spriel >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 26-4-2017 17:44, Steve deRosier wrote: >>>> On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 1:53 AM, Kalle Valo wro= te: >>>>> Arend Van Spriel wrote: >>>>>> An issue was found brcmfmac driver in which a skbuff in .start_xmit(= ) >>>>>> callback was actually cloned. So instead of checking for sufficient >>>>>> headroom it should also be writable. Hence use skb_cow_head() to >>>>>> check and expand the headroom appropriately. >>>>>> >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Arend van Spriel >>>>> >>>>> Steve, would you have time to run a quick test with this? >>>>> >>>>> Patch set to Deferred. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Happy to give it a quick spin on both of my platforms. >>>> > > @ Arend and James, thanks for the info. I understand it, but > unfortunately I can't seem to replicate the problems on my platforms > with the limited time I have available to test it. It also may have to > do with my platforms having special custom bridging related code, or > just me having setup too simple of a test. > > That said... > > @Kalle: I have tested on both my 6004 and 6003 platforms. I didn't > notice any incorrect behavior in my testing. But I don't have a test > setup that would have shown the original problem as reported on the > brcm driver so I can't say that the change actually _fixes_ anything. > Only that in my testing it doesn't seem to break anything. > > Tested-by: Steve deRosier Yeah, I was mostly worried about regression. I didn't expect you to replicate the bug. Thanks for testing, I'll add this patch to my queue. --=20 Kalle Valo=