> Shouldn't this be done as part of patch 7/15 instead of a separate commit > that fixes the earlier changes in the same patchset? > > Or to be more exact, I'd prefer prefer to see the sae_parse_commit() change > to introduce the new argument to return the IE offset as its own > independent patch that does not change any real functionality other than > introducing that capability. That would be before patch 7/15 and then the > remaining items from this 14/15 would be merged into patch 7/15. > Sure, makes sense. I will re-arrange this. > > @@ -1726,6 +1733,10 @@ static int sme_sae_auth(struct wpa_supplicant > *wpa_s, u16 auth_transaction, > > return -1; > > if (sae_check_confirm(&wpa_s->sme.sae, data, len) < 0) > > return -1; > > + > > + if (ie_offset && wpa_s->sme.sae.tmp) > > + *ie_offset = 2 + wpa_s->sme.sae.tmp->kck_len; > > What is this doing and how this is related to the ie_offset value from > sae_parse_commit()? At minimum, this would benefit of a comment > explaining what that 2 is and what this has to do with KCK length. ie_offset is set to the offset to the IE's, after skipping all the fixed parts. It's not related to parse_commit as it's under "else if" part, though to make it similar, maybe it would be better to pass it as an argument to sae_check_confirm() as well. 2 bytes are for send-confirm field and the rest is the confirm hash. I'll add a comment to clarify this. Andrei > > -- > Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA _______________________________________________ Hostap mailing list Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
