linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] cfg80211: Add new wireless regulatory infrastructure

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 8 Sep 2008 22:48:05 -0700
From:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <lrodriguez@...eros.com>
To:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
CC:	Luis Rodriguez <Luis.Rodriguez@...eros.com>,
	"johannes@...solutions.net" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	"linville@...driver.com" <linville@...driver.com>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 v5] cfg80211: Add new wireless regulatory
	infrastructure

On Fri, Sep 05, 2008 at 07:33:14PM -0700, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> can we get a small document in Documentation/ that describes what has to
> be done for CRDA. That would help to ease the adaption and would allow
> us to point people to it. Nothing fancy, but some quick notes where to
> find it and what to put where.

Sure, I'm putting this together now.

> > Each driver can regulatory_hint() a regulatory domain
> > based on either their EEPROM mapped regulatory domain value to a
> > respective ISO/IEC 3166-1 country code or pass an internally built
> > regulatory domain. We also add support to let the user set the
> > regulatory domain through userspace in case of faulty EEPROMs to
> > further help compliance.
> 
> Do we have an example for all the possible ways? I think about something
> to help driver maintainers to move over and use the infrastructure the
> right way.

The only case I didn't test was the case for Intel's drivers, all other
drivers would use regulatory_hint() based on an alpha2 and that worked
swell. I found some issues with the case of providing a built regulatory
domain so I'm updating it now and am also updating some other parts of the
code for the old regulatory infrastructure, it seems there were a few
obvious issues we didn't catch there yet.

I hope to have the new doc for you with a few fixes and an example as to
what Intel drivers can do soon. I was hoping to get it all done by today but
that didn't happen.

  Luis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/