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, 27 Jun 2022 21:46:21 +0200
From:   Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>,
        Phillip Potter <phil@...lpotter.co.uk>,
        Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
        Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: r8188eu: drop return value from
 receive_disconnect

Hi Greg and all,

Thus wrote Greg Kroah-Hartman (gregkh@...uxfoundation.org):

> >  	/* check A3 */
> >  	if (!(!memcmp(MacAddr, get_my_bssid(&pmlmeinfo->network), ETH_ALEN)))
> > -		return _SUCCESS;
> > +		return;

> Shouldn't this check return an error instead of success?  If not, what
> exactly is this checking this for?

my understanding is that receive_disconnect is called when an access
point is no longer usable. This could be a deauth or disassoc message or
a beacon with incorrect info (so we assume the access point isn't
working any more).

The if statement checks if the notification is about the access point to
which we're connected. If not, we don't have to process the notification.
I guess this is not necessarily an error.

Thanks & Best regards,

   Martin

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ