Hello, Sorry. I missed your previous email. I agree that your solution is better and cleaner. Do you want me to submit a new patch? Sincerely, Bertold Van den Bergh On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 6:03 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, 2015-08-13 at 11:09 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Wed, 2015-08-05 at 15:38 +0200, Bertold Van den Bergh wrote: >> > The current implementation in ocb.c can cause a kernel oops when >> > the >> > interface is up, but no ocb has been joined. When data is received >> > with the broadcast BSSID rx_no_sta is called. This function uses >> > uninitialized variables because the join function has not yet been >> > used. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Bertold Van den Bergh < >> > bertold.vandenbergh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> > --- >> > net/mac80211/ocb.c | 3 +++ >> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> > >> > diff --git a/net/mac80211/ocb.c b/net/mac80211/ocb.c >> > index 573b81a..5da2bd3 100644 >> > --- a/net/mac80211/ocb.c >> > +++ b/net/mac80211/ocb.c >> > @@ -50,6 +50,9 @@ void ieee80211_ocb_rx_no_sta(struct >> > ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, >> > struct sta_info *sta; >> > int band; >> > >> > + if (!ifocb->joined) >> > + return; >> > >> Wouldn't it make more sense to put this check into >> ieee80211_accept_frame() and, in addition to not doing any station >> processing, simply dropping the frame completely? Like such: >> > > Reminder? I'm not sure what to do with this patch - I don't > particularly like processing the frame at all. > > johannes -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
