linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] 802.11n IBSS: wlan0 stops receiving packets due to aggregation after sender reboot

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: <628ec530-1f68-e34b-39a5-b3d994d9376c@cogentembedded.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Oct 2019 12:42:00 +0300
From:   Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>
To:     Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@...p.pl>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 802.11n IBSS: wlan0 stops receiving packets due to
 aggregation after sender reboot

Hello!

On 21.10.2019 15:18, Krzysztof Hałasa wrote:

> Fix a bug where the mac80211 RX aggregation code sets a new aggregation
> "session" at the remote station's request, but the head_seq_num
> (the sequence number the receiver expects to receive) isn't reset.
> 
> Spotted on a pair of AR9580 in IBSS mode.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Halasa <khalasa@...p.pl>
> 
> diff --git a/net/mac80211/agg-rx.c b/net/mac80211/agg-rx.c
> index 4d1c335e06e5..775a51cc51c9 100644
> --- a/net/mac80211/agg-rx.c
> +++ b/net/mac80211/agg-rx.c
> @@ -354,9 +354,11 @@ void ___ieee80211_start_rx_ba_session(struct sta_info *sta,
>   			 */
>   			rcu_read_lock();
>   			tid_rx = rcu_dereference(sta->ampdu_mlme.tid_rx[tid]);
> -			if (tid_rx && tid_rx->timeout == timeout)
> +			if (tid_rx && tid_rx->timeout == timeout) {
> +				tid_rx->ssn = start_seq_num;
> +				tid_rx->head_seq_num = start_seq_num;
>   				status = WLAN_STATUS_SUCCESS;
> -			else
> +			} else

    If you add {} on one branch of *if*, you also need to add {} to all other 
branches, says CodingStyle...

[...]

MBR, Sergei