On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 03:40:10PM -0600, Robert Perry Hooker wrote: > Thanks for taking a look, Dan. Sorry if I missed the mark here. > > Can you tell me a bit more about the bug this would introduce? > > I see that ieee80211_is_action is defined like this: static inline bool > ieee80211_is_action(__le16 fc) > > ...and that buff[FRAME_TYPE_ID]is a u8 (since FRAME_TYPE_ID = 0). > > Is there an issue with calling cpu_to_le16 on a u8 that isn't encountered by > implicitly casting a u8 to __le16? Or am I > missing something else? >
Oh... Hm. You're right. I just was thinking that since buff was a little endian buffer but it's only reading a u8. It should probably be reading a le16... The buff likely is just a regular ieee80211_hdr struct. So you're fixing a bug, but probably not in the right way. We should instead just say "struct ieee80211_hdr *hdr = buff;" and instead of treating it like an array of u8. Probably it requires testing... regards, dan carpenter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list de...@linuxdriverproject.org http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
