On Mon, Jun 03, 2013 at 05:01:30PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-06-03 at 08:39 +0200, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
>
> > @@ -2845,6 +2852,10 @@ static int ieee80211_mgmt_tx(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct wireless_dev *wdev,
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > chanctx_conf = rcu_dereference(sdata->vif.chanctx_conf);
> >
> > + /* if no channel was specified, use the current one */
> > + if (chanctx_conf && !chan)
> > + chan = chanctx_conf->def.chan;
> > +
> > if (chanctx_conf)
> > need_offchan = chan != chanctx_conf->def.chan;
> > else
> > @@ -2852,6 +2863,12 @@ static int ieee80211_mgmt_tx(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct wireless_dev *wdev,
> > rcu_read_unlock();
> > }
> >
> > + /* at this point a channel should have been chosen */
> > + if (!chan) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
> > + goto out_unlock;
> > + }
> > +
>
> These two changes make no sense at all. If you look at the function
> you'll see that "chan" isn't used at all after the check,
uhm? it is passed to ieee80211_start_roc_work() right after (this part has not
been changed).
2904 ret = ieee80211_start_roc_work(local, sdata, chan,
> and modifying
> the "check if ..." part to use the channel also doesn't make sense.
>
to which part do you exactly refer? I'm just ensuring that the chan variable
gets assigned before something accesses it.
Cheers,
--
Antonio Quartulli
..each of us alone is worth nothing..
Ernesto "Che" Guevara
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
