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  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]
Date:	Tue, 30 Mar 2010 10:52:53 +0200
From:	Daniel Mack <>
To:	Holger Schurig <>
Cc:, Dan Williams <>,
	"John W. Linville" <>,
	Bing Zhao <>,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/wireless/libertas: do not call wiphy_unregister()
 w/o wiphy_register()

On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 08:49:07AM +0200, Holger Schurig wrote:
> > The libertas driver calls wiphy_unregister() without a prior
> > wiphy_register() when a devices fails initialization. Fix this by
> > introducing a private flag.
> Nice.
> However, I wonder: do we really need a private variable?  Does each driver 
> introduce a private variable for this?

I didn't check other drivers thoroughly. I just saw the comment on the
function which does the wiphy allocation and considered libertas to be
special in the way it deals with the wireless core:

 * At this time lbs_private *priv doesn't even exist, so we just allocate
 * memory and don't initialize the wiphy further. This is postponed until we
 * can talk to the firmware and happens at registration time in
 * lbs_cfg_wiphy_register().

And as I didn't find any function to tell me whether a wiphy has been
registered and not just allocated, I saw no other way than manually
track what the libertas driver does.

If there's any better solution, I'd happily test it.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists