linux-kernel - Re: [v1] wifi: mwifiex: Fix interface type change

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: Fri, 17 May 2024 12:32:44 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
To: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>
Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>,  Rafael Beims
 <rafael.beims@...adex.com>,  linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
  linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,  tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com,  David Lin
 <yu-hao.lin@....com>,  stable@...r.kernel.org,  Francesco Dolcini
 <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
Subject: Re: [v1] wifi: mwifiex: Fix interface type change

Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it> writes:

> On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 08:04:24AM +0000, Kalle Valo wrote:
>
>> Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it> wrote:
>> 
>> > From: Rafael Beims <rafael.beims@...adex.com>
>> > 
>> > When changing the interface type we also need to update the bss_num, the
>> > driver private data is searched based on a unique (bss_type, bss_num)
>> > tuple, therefore every time bss_type changes, bss_num must also change.
>> > 
>> > This fixes for example an issue in which, after the mode changed, a
>> > wireless scan on the changed interface would not finish, leading to
>> > repeated -EBUSY messages to userspace when other scan requests were
>> > sent.
>> > 
>> > Fixes: c606008b7062 ("mwifiex: Properly initialize private
>> > structure on interface type changes")
>> > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
>> > Signed-off-by: Rafael Beims <rafael.beims@...adex.com>
>> > Signed-off-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
>> 
>> BTW I removed the Reviewed-by from the commit message, I don't see the need to
>> have both Reviewed-by and s-o-b.
>
> Sure, I was in doubt about this, in the end I added it because I have seen
> this done in other subsystems, e.g. commit 6a4020b4c639 ("drm/bridge:
> tc358768: fix PLL parameters computation").

Heh, yeah we all do things a bit differently :) In my view s-o-b implies
that you have reviewed it as well but clearly not everyone think the
same. I'm fine either way, this is cosmetics anyway.

-- 
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches