linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: rtl8188eu: Fix private WEXT IOCTL calls

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: <f0edc1ca-df95-6f7c-f345-24b59f9e1c9c@gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 25 Nov 2017 19:12:28 +0100
From:   Ishraq Ibne Ashraf <ishraq.i.ashraf@...il.com>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, himanshujha199640@...il.com,
        goudapatilk@...il.com, insafonov@...il.com,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] staging: rtl8188eu: Fix private WEXT IOCTL calls

Hi,

What was broken was private/device specific IOCTL calls implemented by this driver. The standard IOCTL calls worked and the driver worked as it was in client mode.

But in AP mode with hostapd (https://w1.fi/hostapd/) the rtl871xdrv driver of hostapd (which is required for using devices that use this driver in AP mode) invokes private/device specific IOCTL calls and in the existing driver they could only be invoked through the ndo_do_ioctl interface of the driver. Support for which was removed in the mentioned commit by Johannes Berg. Hence the driver stopped working in AP mode with hostapd using rtl871xdrv driver.

The solution was to implement equivalent versions of the existing private/device specific IOCTLs which will be invoked by the iw_handler_def interface.

Cheers,
Ishraq

On 11/25/2017 05:40 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> I added Johannes to the CC list again because this is sort of his
> fault...  To be honest, I'm a little bit puzzled.  I would have thought
> Johannes's change would have made some code unused and that we could
> delete it now.  I haven't looked at this.