netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/6] d80211: add IEEE802.11e/WMM MLMEs, Status Code and Reason Code

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: <1166073861.2929.67.camel@debian.sh.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Dec 2006 13:24:21 +0800
From:	Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...el.com>
To:	Michael Wu <flamingice@...rmilk.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Benc <jbenc@...e.cz>,
	John Linville <linville@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] d80211: add IEEE802.11e/WMM MLMEs, Status Code and
	Reason Code

On Wed, 2006-12-13 at 23:38 -0500, Michael Wu wrote:
> On Wednesday 13 December 2006 23:02, Zhu Yi wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Zhu Yi <yi.zhu@...el.com>
> >
> You should probably have more in the description..
> 
> > ---
> >
> >  include/net/d80211_mgmt.h |  148
> > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 files changed, 148
> > insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> d80211_mgmt.h was recently merged into include/linux/ieee80211.h.
> 
> > d83f6236e756f5f0bb1484d991884444f06704de
> > diff --git a/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h b/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h
> > index 87141d4..450c0a2 100644
> > --- a/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h
> > +++ b/include/net/d80211_mgmt.h
> > @@ -14,6 +14,39 @@
> >
> >  #include <linux/types.h>
> >
> > +struct ieee802_11_ts_info {
> > +	__le16 traffic_type:1;
> > +	__le16 tsid:4;
> > +	__le16 direction:2;
> > +	__le16 access_policy:2;
> > +	__le16 aggregation:1;
> > +	__le16 apsd:1;
> > +	__le16 up:3;
> > +	__le16 ack_policy:2;
> > +	u8 schedule:1;
> > +	u8 reserved:7;
> > +} __attribute__ ((packed));
> > +
> Mind eliminating the bitfields?

Yeah, I thought of it. But if it is defined something like below

struct ieee802_11_ts_info {
	short field;
	byte another_field;
} ts_info;

Then,

up = (ts_info.field1 & 0x3800) >> 11;
schedule = (ts_info.another_field & 0x01);

So if I want to use "schedule", I need to know more details (i.e. which
field it belongs to). Are these efficient?

Thanks,
-yi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html