linux-kernel - Re: [ 08/12] mac80211: zero initialize count field in ieee80211_tx

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

Message-ID: <1331565826.3022.156.camel@deadeye>
Date:	Mon, 12 Mar 2012 15:23:46 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
To:	Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan <mohammed@....qualcomm.com>
Cc:	Willy Tarreau <w@....eu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>,
	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [ 08/12] mac80211: zero initialize count field in
 ieee80211_tx_rate

On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 12:22 +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> Hi Willy,
> 
> > On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 10:06:23AM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote:
> >>> So I'm pretty sure this patch is wrong for 2.6.32; it could be
> >>> backported but I don't think the change is necessary anyway.
> >>
> >> true, but i think its better to initialize the count = 0 rather than
> >> count = 1, though the older version driver checks for rate[i].idx>= 0
> >> in ath_rc_tx_status. while the ath_tx_status has no such iteration in
> >> the older driver code.
> >
> > In practice, if the patch brings nothing and not even correctness, I'd
> > rather drop it than make us believe that some issue is fixed. However
> > if you think it does happen to fix a real issue in 2.6.32 (possibly
> > combined with some other missing patch), please tell me so and I will
> > happily undelete it.
> >
> 
> we can drop it. also as there was no driver code checking for 
> rate[i].count in the 2.6.32 driver. i am also not sure this fixes 
> something in 2.6.32 but the patch itself is correct.
[...]

Please read and answer the *whole* of my earlier message.  The later
code in the rate_control_get_rate() function in 2.6.32 does appear to
depend on .count = 1, and there may be code elsewhere that does so too.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Life would be so much easier if we could look at the source code.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (829 bytes)