On Mon, 02 Oct 2006 10:52:45 PDT, Jean Tourrilhes said:
> On Fri, Sep 29, 2006 at 06:20:08PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Fri, 29 Sep 2006 20:01:54 -0400
> > > 
> > > % grep ioctl /tmp/foo2 | sort -u | more
> > > ioctl(13, SIOCGIWESSID, 0xbfbcdb9c)     = 0
> > > ioctl(13, SIOCGIWRANGE, 0xbfbcdbdc)     = 0
> > > ioctl(13, SIOCGIWRATE, 0xbfbcdbbc)      = 0
> > 
> > Yes.  The main thing which those WE-21 patches do is to shorten the size of
> > various buffers which are used in wireless ioctls.
> 
> 	Ok, I've found it. Actually, I feel ashamed, as it is a fairly
> classical buffer overflow, we put one extra char in a buffer. Now, I
> don't understand why it did not blow up on my box ;-)
> 	New patch. I think it is right, but I would not mind Pavel to
> have a look at it. On my box it does not make thing worse.
> 	Valdis : would you mind trying if this patch fix the problem
> you are seeing with WE-21 ? If it fixes it, I'll send it to John...

Been up and running with we-21 configured in, and gkrellm doing the monitoring
that gave it indigestion.  It was dying in 1-2 minutes, now been up for 30 mins
with no issues....