From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org ([198.145.29.96]:37352 "EHLO smtp.codeaurora.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752744AbdC1PAp (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Mar 2017 11:00:45 -0400 From: Kalle Valo To: Arend Van Spriel Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Daniel J Blueman Subject: Re: [PATCH for-4.11 0/2] brcmfmac: fixing use-after-free reports References: <1490688691-20100-1-git-send-email-arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com> <87o9wl7gt4.fsf@purkki.adurom.net> <7e8b6c65-e051-f86b-8b21-dfb0d5b966d3@broadcom.com> Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2017 18:00:23 +0300 In-Reply-To: <7e8b6c65-e051-f86b-8b21-dfb0d5b966d3@broadcom.com> (Arend Van Spriel's message of "Tue, 28 Mar 2017 16:08:22 +0200") Message-ID: <87lgrpv43c.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com> (sfid-20170328_170214_123440_DA19803D) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Arend Van Spriel writes: > On 28-3-2017 13:59, Kalle Valo wrote: >> Arend van Spriel writes: >> >>> Two use-after-free issues were found using KASAN and reported by >>> Daniel J Blueman. One of them was submitted as patch. However, no >>> response came upon my comments. So decided to push the fixes myself. >>> >>> These patches are intended for v4.11 and apply to the master branch of >>> the wireless-drivers repository. >>> >>> Arend van Spriel (2): >>> brcmfmac: use local iftype avoiding use-after-free of virtual >>> interface >>> cfg80211: check rdev resume callback only for registered wiphy >>> >>> drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/p2p.c | 8 +++++--- >>> net/wireless/sysfs.c | 10 ++++------ >>> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) >> >> Why are these in the same patchset, are there any dependencies etc? Or >> is it safe that Johannes applies the cfg80211 patch to mac80211.git and >> I apply brcmfmac to wireless-drivers.git? > > Yeah. My bad. I just realized while driving to pick up my son from > school :-p Hehe, that has happened to me also :) > Anyway, these are in the same patchset just because of their context > and independent so you both can apply them in their respective > repository. Ok, we'll take them separately. Thanks. -- Kalle Valo