Re: [PATCH] wifi: rtw88: sdio: copy RX status after updating the frequency

[Luka Gejak]

October 9, 2026 at 3:49 AM, "Hungyu Lin" <dennylin0707@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> 
> rtw_sdio_rx_skb() copies rx_status to the skb before calling
> rtw_update_rx_freq_for_invalid(). If the frequency is corrected, the skb
> still carries the old value when it is passed to mac80211.
> 
> Move the copy after the frequency update, as the PCI and USB RX paths
> already do.
> 
> Fixes: 53ed4b25a79a ("wifi: rtw88: 8822c: Parse channel from IE to correct invalid hardware reports")
> Signed-off-by: Hungyu Lin <dennylin0707@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> Built the rtw88 directory on arm64 with GCC 13.3.0 and W=1, with
> RTW88_8723BS, RTW88_SDIO, RTW88_PCI and RTW88_USB enabled.
> 
> A userspace test of the old and new receive function, with helper calls
> stubbed, confirmed that the corrected frequency reaches skb->cb.
> No hardware testing.
> 
>  drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/sdio.c | 3 +--
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/sdio.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/sdio.c
> index dc2fd0f8f9ff..7c22f0ba5329 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/sdio.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/sdio.c
> @@ -1332,8 +1332,6 @@ static void rtw_sdio_rx_skb(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  u32 pkt_offset, struct rtw_rx_pkt_stat *pkt_stat,
>  struct ieee80211_rx_status *rx_status)
>  {
> - *IEEE80211_SKB_RXCB(skb) = *rx_status;
> -
>  if (pkt_stat->is_c2h) {
>  skb_put(skb, pkt_stat->pkt_len + pkt_offset);
>  rtw_fw_c2h_cmd_rx_irqsafe(rtwdev, pkt_offset, skb);
> @@ -1346,6 +1344,7 @@ static void rtw_sdio_rx_skb(struct rtw_dev *rtwdev, struct sk_buff *skb,
>  rtw_update_rx_freq_for_invalid(rtwdev, skb, rx_status, pkt_stat);
>  rtw_rx_stats(rtwdev, pkt_stat->vif, skb);
>  
> + *IEEE80211_SKB_RXCB(skb) = *rx_status;
>  ieee80211_rx_irqsafe(rtwdev->hw, skb);
>  }
>  
> 
> base-commit: 83de3a16c7b37064a59305040ba9b0f93b832794
> -- 
> 2.43.0
>

Looks good to me, I also found a preexisting issue while reviewing so
I'm sending a patch for that today.

Either way,

Reviewed-by: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@xxxxxxxxx>

Best regards,
Luka Gejak