On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 13:53 +0200, Zefir Kurtisi wrote: > On 06/20/2012 10:46 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2012-06-20 at 10:44 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > >>> + if ((!chan->radar_detect_timeout || > >>> + time_is_after_jiffies(chan->radar_detect_timeout)) && > >>> + (chan->flags & IEEE80211_CHAN_RADAR)) > >>> + return -EPERM; > >> > >> Ok so you reject it if it's 0, but the jiffies calculation could return > >> 0 too.. in fact, since jiffies start at -5 minutes on boot, you might > >> even hit it if you start radar detection 4 minutes after boot. > > > > Also, it seems that the value should be reset eventually ... at least on > > interface down or so. Otherwise you can start CAC, then bring the > > interface down to stop the device, and then bring it back up (CAC check > > is no longer running) and then you can use the channel after some time > > even though you never really checked for radar... > > > No, if you bring it back up on the same DFS channel, > radar_detection_timeout will be set back to +60s by > start_radar_detection(). Looks safe to me. You need to think a bit more outside the regular code flows ... What if I'm not calling start_radar_detection()? 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
