Re: [PATCH] wifi: rtw88: fix skb leak in hw_scan probe request length check

From: Thadeu Lima de Souza Cascardo

Date: Sat Nov 14 2026 - 12:07:10 EST


On Sat, Nov 14, 2026 at 02:40:24PM +0100, Luka Gejak wrote:
> On November 13, 2026 4:17:33 PM GMT+01:00, Mauricio Faria de Oliveira
> <mfo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >In _rtw_hw_scan_update_probe_req(), if the first loop fails (goto out;)
> >the
> >skb is leaked. It does not reach kfree_skb() at the end of the loop body
> >or
> >in the second loop (out:) since it is unlinked from probe_req_list.
> >
> >Fix the leak by calling kfree_skb() if the first loop fails.
> >
> >In /sys/kernel/debug/kmemleak, after simulating the failure:
> >
> > unreferenced object 0xffff88810965a000 (size 232):
> > comm "iw", pid 4729, jiffies 4345008185
> > hex dump (first 32 bytes):
> > 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> > 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
> > backtrace (crc 20f7de11):
> > kmem_cache_alloc_node_noprof+0x302/0x380
> > __alloc_skb+0x74/0x2f0
> > skb_copy+0x57/0xe0
> > rtw_hw_scan_update_probe_req+0xff/0x230
> > rtw_hw_scan_prehandle+0x4e/0x180
> > rtw_hw_scan_offload+0x186/0x1d0
> > rtw_ops_hw_scan+0x61/0xb0
> > drv_hw_scan+0x81/0x130
> > __ieee80211_start_scan+0x2e0/0x760
> > rdev_scan+0x42/0x100
> > nl80211_trigger_scan+0x53b/0x730
> > genl_family_rcv_msg_doit+0x103/0x160
> > genl_rcv_msg+0x1b5/0x2c0
> > netlink_rcv_skb+0x52/0x100
> > genl_rcv+0x28/0x40
> > netlink_unicast+0x26d/0x3b0
> >
>
> Should this dump go under --- so it doesn't end up in commit message?
>

I find stack traces particularly helpful in commit messages. The help find
out fixes for bugs one encounter, avoiding duplicate work, and they also
justify the commit.

Cascardo.

> >This leak exists in the first loop since the function was introduced, and
> >still happened with the addition of the second loop, in these two commits:
> >
> >Fixes: 10d162b2ed39 ("rtw88: 8822c: add ieee80211_ops::hw_scan")
> >Fixes: d95984b5580d ("rtw88: fix memory overrun and memory leak during hw_scan")
>
> Should this perhaps cc stable?
>
> >Signed-off-by: Mauricio Faria de Oliveira <mfo@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >---
>
> Either way I'm fine with the code, so just fix the commit message. Feel
> free to carry the tag for v2.
>
> Reviewed-by: Luka Gejak <luka.gejak@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> Best regards,
> Luka Gejak