linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] wifi: cfg80211: Add beacon hint notifier support

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: <1df59863e78e8ddbe7eb3a74e6dd4c8f0bd7f098.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jan 2023 17:30:11 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:     Youghandhar Chintala <quic_youghand@...cinc.com>,
        ath10k@...ts.infradead.org
Cc:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        quic_mpubbise@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] wifi: cfg80211: Add beacon hint notifier support


> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> @@ -5386,6 +5386,8 @@ struct wiphy {
>  	void (*reg_notifier)(struct wiphy *wiphy,
>  			     struct regulatory_request *request);
>  
> +	void (*beacon_hint_notifier)(struct wiphy *wiphy);


missing documentation, for sure

Also this should probably be in the ops, rather than here? Not sure why
reg_notifier is here.

> -	if (channel_changed)
> +	if (channel_changed) {
>  		nl80211_send_beacon_hint_event(wiphy, &chan_before, chan);
> +		if (wiphy->beacon_hint_notifier)
> +			wiphy->beacon_hint_notifier(wiphy);
> +	}

This also seems excessive if you're not even passing the channel - you
call it for every (affected) channel, but you don't tell it anything
about the channel? Seems strange.


However ...

Why is this even needed? You should always get reg_notifier after this
anyway?

johannes