Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] nl80211: process additional attributes in NL80211_CMD_SET_BEACON

[Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 5/5/2022 10:34 AM, Aloka Dixit wrote:
> FILS discovery and unsolicited broadcast probe response transmissions
> are configured as part of NL80211_CMD_START_AP, however both stop
> after userspace issues NL80211_CMD_SET_BEACON command as these
> attributes are not processed as part of this command.
> Add the missing implementation.
>
> Modify the local variable in nl80211_set_beacon() and input parameter
> to rdev_change_beacon() from type struct cfg80211_beacon_data to
> type struct cfg80211_ap_settings to support the new processing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Aloka Dixit <quic_alokad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> v1:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20210120005229.32582-2-alokad@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
>
>   include/net/cfg80211.h  |  2 +-
>   net/wireless/nl80211.c  | 24 ++++++++++++++++---
>   net/wireless/rdev-ops.h |  2 +-
>   net/wireless/trace.h    | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
>   4 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/cfg80211.h b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> index 68713388b617..b388e5c9beb8 100644
> --- a/include/net/cfg80211.h
> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
> @@ -4195,7 +4195,7 @@ struct cfg80211_ops {
>   	int	(*start_ap)(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *dev,
>   			    struct cfg80211_ap_settings *settings);
>   	int	(*change_beacon)(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *dev,
> -				 struct cfg80211_beacon_data *info);
> +				 struct cfg80211_ap_settings *info);
>   	int	(*stop_ap)(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *dev);
>   
>   
> diff --git a/net/wireless/nl80211.c b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> index 945ed87d12e0..ee94ad8cd619 100644
> --- a/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> +++ b/net/wireless/nl80211.c
> @@ -5799,9 +5799,11 @@ static int nl80211_set_beacon(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
>   	struct cfg80211_registered_device *rdev = info->user_ptr[0];
>   	struct net_device *dev = info->user_ptr[1];
>   	struct wireless_dev *wdev = dev->ieee80211_ptr;
> -	struct cfg80211_beacon_data params;
> +	struct cfg80211_ap_settings params;
>   	int err;
>   
> +	memset(&params, 0, sizeof(params));
> +

is adding an = {} initializer preferable?

>   	if (dev->ieee80211_ptr->iftype != NL80211_IFTYPE_AP &&
>   	    dev->ieee80211_ptr->iftype != NL80211_IFTYPE_P2P_GO)
>   		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
> @@ -5812,16 +5814,32 @@ static int nl80211_set_beacon(struct sk_buff *skb, struct genl_info *info)
>   	if (!wdev->beacon_interval)
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
> -	err = nl80211_parse_beacon(rdev, info->attrs, &params);
> +	err = nl80211_parse_beacon(rdev, info->attrs, &params.beacon);
>   	if (err)
>   		goto out;
>   
> +	if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_FILS_DISCOVERY]) {
> +		err = nl80211_parse_fils_discovery(rdev,
> +						   info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_FILS_DISCOVERY],
> +						   &params);
> +		if (err)
> +			goto out;
> +	}
> +
> +	if (info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_UNSOL_BCAST_PROBE_RESP]) {
> +		err = nl80211_parse_unsol_bcast_probe_resp(
> +				rdev, info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_UNSOL_BCAST_PROBE_RESP],
> +				&params);
> +		if (err)
> +			goto out;
> +	}
> +

would adding a local variable 'attr' make the code more readable?
	attr = info->attrs[NL80211_ATTR_{foo}];
	if (attr) {
		err = nl80211_parse_{foo}(rdev, attr, &params);

>   	wdev_lock(wdev);
>   	err = rdev_change_beacon(rdev, dev, &params);
>   	wdev_unlock(wdev);
>   
>   out:
> -	kfree(params.mbssid_ies);
> +	kfree(params.beacon.mbssid_ies);
>   	return err;
>   }
[...snip...]