wifi: mt76: add missing lock protection in mt76_sta_state for sta_event callback

mt76_sta_state() calls the sta_event callback without holding dev->mutex.
However, mt7915_mac_sta_event() (MT7915 implementation of this callback)
calls mt7915_mac_twt_teardown_flow() which has
lockdep_assert_held(&dev->mt76.mutex) indicating that callers must
hold this lock.

The locking pattern in mt76_sta_state() is inconsistent:
- mt76_sta_add() acquires dev->mutex before calling dev->drv->sta_add
- mt76_sta_remove() acquires dev->mutex before calling __mt76_sta_remove
- But sta_event callback is called without acquiring the lock

Add mutex_lock()/mutex_unlock() around the mt7915_mac_twt_teardown_flow
invocation to fix the missing lock protection and maintain consistency
with the existing locking pattern.

Signed-off-by: Ziyi Guo <[email protected]>
Link: https://patch.msgid.link/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau <[email protected]>
This commit is contained in:
Ziyi Guo
2026-03-01 16:46:52 +00:00
committed by Felix Fietkau
parent a6761a9892
commit 003216cc04
+2
View File
@@ -859,8 +859,10 @@ int mt7915_mac_sta_event(struct mt76_dev *mdev, struct ieee80211_vif *vif,
return mt7915_mcu_add_sta(dev, vif, sta, CONN_STATE_PORT_SECURE, false); return mt7915_mcu_add_sta(dev, vif, sta, CONN_STATE_PORT_SECURE, false);
case MT76_STA_EVENT_DISASSOC: case MT76_STA_EVENT_DISASSOC:
mutex_lock(&dev->mt76.mutex);
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msta->twt.flow); i++) for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(msta->twt.flow); i++)
mt7915_mac_twt_teardown_flow(dev, msta, i); mt7915_mac_twt_teardown_flow(dev, msta, i);
mutex_unlock(&dev->mt76.mutex);
mt7915_mcu_add_sta(dev, vif, sta, CONN_STATE_DISCONNECT, false); mt7915_mcu_add_sta(dev, vif, sta, CONN_STATE_DISCONNECT, false);
msta->wcid.sta_disabled = 1; msta->wcid.sta_disabled = 1;