Re: [PATCH v2] mac80211: reject station addition if AP or MLO link is inactive
Slawomir Stepien <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:26:03 +0200
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.syzbot,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-wireless |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <amcyO4e4bnBPinrP@nr200> |
On lip 27, 2026 11:25, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2026-07-27 at 11:22 +0200, Slawomir Stepien wrote: > > > > I think we do not have. I'm looking at the struct wireless_dev fields and I see that there is just > > info about what the configuration should be, not info about what is the current state of the device. > > I also do not see any callback in struct cfg80211_ops that might help to get such info. If I'm wrong > > then please correct my observation! > > I think we maintain wdev->links[].ap.beacon_interval? Ah: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.4/source/net/wireless/nl80211.c#L7188 and https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v7.1.4/source/net/wireless/ap.c#L36. Ok! Let me try using that in v3 then. Thanks! > > Beside this, do we think that all devices would always need this rejection? What if firmware of > > these devices would benefit from *lack* of such rejection? Just thinking aloud, not that I know such > > devices. > > I don't think it should be legal in the userspace API, and even if they > did, we'd have to add a flag to let hostapd know about it, and then when > (probably never) we did that, we could change the checks along with the > API. Sure. If you think it should be like that I can agree, since I do not have any opinion here. -- Slawomir Stepien