[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_6FF36BC379E97AE3ADC450776CD77EA6C405@qq.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2025 21:56:26 +0800
From: Edward Adam Davis <eadavis@...com>
To: johannes@...solutions.net
Cc: eadavis@...com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+064815c6cd721082a52a@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mac80211_hwsim: Prevent tsf from setting if beacon is disabled
On Wed, 23 Apr 2025 14:53:53 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c
> > @@ -1226,6 +1226,11 @@ static void mac80211_hwsim_set_tsf(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> > {
> > struct mac80211_hwsim_data *data = hw->priv;
> > u64 now = mac80211_hwsim_get_tsf(hw, vif);
> > + struct ieee80211_bss_conf *conf = link_conf_dereference_protected(vif,
> > + data->link_data[0].link_id);
> > +
> > + if (conf && !conf->enable_beacon)
> > + return;
> > /* MLD not supported here */
> > u32 bcn_int = data->link_data[0].beacon_int;
> > u64 delta = abs(tsf - now);
>
> Please keep kernel coding style - the line break there is awful (but
> with "conf = ..." on a line by itself it can be just one line), and you
> shouldn't have code before variable declarations.
like this?
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c b/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c
index cf3e976471c6..6ca5d9d0fe53 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/virtual/mac80211_hwsim.c
@@ -1229,6 +1229,11 @@ static void mac80211_hwsim_set_tsf(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
/* MLD not supported here */
u32 bcn_int = data->link_data[0].beacon_int;
u64 delta = abs(tsf - now);
+ struct ieee80211_bss_conf *conf;
+
+ conf = link_conf_dereference_protected(vif, data->link_data[0].link_id);
+ if (conf && !conf->enable_beacon)
+ return;
/* adjust after beaconing with new timestamp at old TBTT */
if (tsf > now) {
>
> The comment should probably also move because it's relevant for your new
> [0] as well.
I don't understand what you mean.
Edward
Powered by blists - more mailing lists