On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 17:26 +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Fri, 2020-12-04 at 08:24 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > From: Eric Dumazet <eduma...@google.com> > > > > If tbl_mpp can not be allocated, we call mesh_table_free(tbl_path) > > while tbl_path rhashtable has not yet been initialized, which causes > > panics. > > Thanks Eric! > > I was going to ask how you ran into this ... > > > Reported-by: syzbot <syzkal...@googlegroups.com> > > Until I saw this - but doesn't syzbot normally want a > "syzbot+somehashid@..." as the reported-by? > > > > --- a/net/mac80211/mesh_pathtbl.c > > +++ b/net/mac80211/mesh_pathtbl.c > > @@ -60,6 +60,7 @@ static struct mesh_table *mesh_table_alloc(void) > > atomic_set(&newtbl->entries, 0); > > spin_lock_init(&newtbl->gates_lock); > > spin_lock_init(&newtbl->walk_lock); > > + rhashtable_init(&newtbl->rhead, &mesh_rht_params); > > > > return newtbl; > > } > > @@ -773,9 +774,6 @@ int mesh_pathtbl_init(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data > > *sdata) > > goto free_path; > > } > > > > - rhashtable_init(&tbl_path->rhead, &mesh_rht_params); > > - rhashtable_init(&tbl_mpp->rhead, &mesh_rht_params); > > > > Hmm. There were two calls, now there's only one? Is that a bug, or am I > missing something?
Umm, never mind. johannes
