On Thursday, October 25, 2012 09:03:42 PM Javier Cardona wrote: > Christian, > > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Christian Lamparter > <chunkeey@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thursday, October 25, 2012 08:10:18 PM Javier Cardona wrote: > >> Per IEEE Std. 802.11-2012, Sec 8.2.4.4.1, the sequence Control field is > >> not present in control frames. We noticed this problem when processing > >> Block Ack Requests. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Javier Cardona <javier@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> Signed-off-by: Javier Lopez <jlopex@xxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> net/mac80211/rx.c | 4 ++++ > >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/net/mac80211/rx.c b/net/mac80211/rx.c > >> index f975f64..bf54336 100644 > >> --- a/net/mac80211/rx.c > >> +++ b/net/mac80211/rx.c > >> @@ -1467,6 +1467,10 @@ ieee80211_rx_h_defragment(struct ieee80211_rx_data *rx) > >> > >> hdr = (struct ieee80211_hdr *)rx->skb->data; > >> fc = hdr->frame_control; > >> + > >> + if (ieee80211_is_ctl(fc)) > >> + return RX_CONTINUE; > >> + > >> sc = le16_to_cpu(hdr->seq_ctrl); > >> frag = sc & IEEE80211_SCTL_FRAG; > >> > > hmm, I see this function also calls skb_linearize() on said > > skb... Does anybody know of any possible side effects? Not > > that control frames (In fact, just BlockACK Requests come > > to my mind) usually so large... > > skb_linearize() is only called on fragmented frames, which is how > regular BlockAckRequests were being processed before. Actually, I checked ieee80211_rx_h_ctrl and the back_req handler uses skb_copy_bits so it doesn't need a linearized skb to start with ;). Regards, Chr -- 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
