Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-7117-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Message-ID: <a840697a-3f58-1c0f-2ca3-66b04686c529@quicinc.com>
Date: Thu, 2 May 2024 09:45:05 -0700
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] wifi: mac80211: Update bssid indicator with real BSS
 numbers
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
        =?UTF-8?B?QWxsZW4gWWUgKOiRieiKt+WLsyk=?= <Allen.Ye@mediatek.com>,
        "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        "lorenzo@kernel.org" <lorenzo@kernel.org>
CC: "lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com" <lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com>,
        "nbd@nbd.name" <nbd@nbd.name>,
        =?UTF-8?B?RXZlbHluIFRzYWkgKOiUoeePiumIuik=?=
	<Evelyn.Tsai@mediatek.com>,
        =?UTF-8?B?TW9uZXkgV2FuZyAo546L5L+h5a6JKQ==?=
	<Money.Wang@mediatek.com>,
        "linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org>
References: <20231208063820.25983-1-allen.ye@mediatek.com>
 <65d21336e8f7e180352403a3e894aeaf27a22cab.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <c23373d71eff81ea043783edff0345502bb2e299.camel@mediatek.com>
 <757f417d63a750e84ab883b500becc2773e9ff17.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <e9c1c8fb20c39ed158f11a6152dc594de6073726.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Content-Language: en-US
From: Aloka Dixit <quic_alokad@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <e9c1c8fb20c39ed158f11a6152dc594de6073726.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 4/23/2024 4:28 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Tue, 2024-04-23 at 13:21 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
>>
>> Anyway, I think I agree, but can you please add some validation of this
>> to cfg80211 as a first patch
> 
> I guess I should say what kind of validation? I think it'd make sense to
> ensure that the elements even exist/are long enough (currently there's
> no validation in nl80211_parse_mbssid_elems at all!!), perhaps call
> validate_ie_attr() there as well.
> 
> Feels like something should also ensure that not only is
> 
> 	config->index < wiphy->mbssid_max_interfaces
> 
> but also actually < 2^max_bssid_indicator?
> 
> johannes
> 

I agree with the validation concerns.
But the actual logic in this patch is valid, although considering we 
have had this code for so many years now, feels like no driver/target 
actually needs this field yet even though it is used :-)