Re: [PATCH 3/3] ath10k: Add BUG_ON if we over-write peer-map pointer.

2016-04-01 Thread Ben Greear 



On 03/31/2016 11:09 PM, Michal Kazior wrote:

On 31 March 2016 at 22:59,   wrote:

From: Ben Greear 

Not sure this can happen, but seems like a reasonable sanity
check.

Signed-off-by: Ben Greear 
---
  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c | 1 +
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c 
b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
index 94c27f6..172b1d6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
@@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ void ath10k_peer_map_event(struct ath10k_htt *htt,
 ath10k_warn(ar, /*ATH10K_DBG_HTT,*/ "htt peer map vdev %d peer %pM id 
%d\n",
ev->vdev_id, ev->addr, ev->peer_id);

+   BUG_ON(ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] && (ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] != 
peer));


Does this really need to be a BUG_ON?


It means we have memory or logic corruption, or maybe we are out of sync with 
the
firmware, so I think it should be very visible, at least for a while.  I haven't
hit it, so not sure it can happen anyway

Thanks,
Ben

--
Ben Greear 
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

___
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

Re: [PATCH 3/3] ath10k: Add BUG_ON if we over-write peer-map pointer.

2016-04-01 Thread Michal Kazior 
On 31 March 2016 at 22:59,   wrote:
> From: Ben Greear 
>
> Not sure this can happen, but seems like a reasonable sanity
> check.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ben Greear 
> ---
>  drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c 
> b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
> index 94c27f6..172b1d6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
> @@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ void ath10k_peer_map_event(struct ath10k_htt *htt,
> ath10k_warn(ar, /*ATH10K_DBG_HTT,*/ "htt peer map vdev %d peer %pM id 
> %d\n",
>ev->vdev_id, ev->addr, ev->peer_id);
>
> +   BUG_ON(ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] && (ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] != 
> peer));

Does this really need to be a BUG_ON?


Michał

___
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k

[PATCH 3/3] ath10k: Add BUG_ON if we over-write peer-map pointer.

2016-03-31 Thread greearb 
From: Ben Greear 

Not sure this can happen, but seems like a reasonable sanity
check.

Signed-off-by: Ben Greear 
---
 drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c 
b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
index 94c27f6..172b1d6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath10k/txrx.c
@@ -309,6 +309,7 @@ void ath10k_peer_map_event(struct ath10k_htt *htt,
ath10k_warn(ar, /*ATH10K_DBG_HTT,*/ "htt peer map vdev %d peer %pM id 
%d\n",
   ev->vdev_id, ev->addr, ev->peer_id);
 
+   BUG_ON(ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] && (ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] != 
peer));
ar->peer_map[ev->peer_id] = peer;
set_bit(ev->peer_id, peer->peer_ids);
 exit:
-- 
2.4.3


___
ath10k mailing list
ath10k@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k