From: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: nbd@nbd.name, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: mt76: mt7921: introduce mt7921_get_mac80211_ops utility routine
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2023 23:16:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZAZmUCBl+8LaoiAq@lore-desk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41b51fcc9e1ba560fbdad76d818d31167d73c265.camel@sipsolutions.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 931 bytes --]
> On Mon, 2023-03-06 at 18:50 +0100, Lorenzo Bianconi wrote:
> >
> > +struct ieee80211_ops *
> > +mt7921_get_mac80211_ops(struct device *dev, void *drv_data, u8 *fw_features)
> > +{
> > + struct ieee80211_ops *ops;
> > +
> > + ops = devm_kmemdup(dev, &mt7921_ops, sizeof(mt7921_ops), GFP_KERNEL);
>
> It's kind of nice to have static const ops so they can't be a target for
> overwriting and function pointer injection, maybe just declare two
> copies with a macro or so, with and without chanctx, and return the
> appropriate one? It won't even use more memory unless you never run a
> device w/o chanctx ops.
In the current status quo I think it is fine but it does not scale if in the
future we want to add some new fw features that require changing ieee80211_ops
pointer. Honestly I do not know if it is something we should consider nowadays.
What do you think?
Regards,
Lorenzo
>
> johannes
>
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-06 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-06 17:50 [PATCH] wifi: mt76: mt7921: introduce mt7921_get_mac80211_ops utility routine Lorenzo Bianconi
2023-03-06 20:49 ` Johannes Berg
2023-03-06 22:16 ` Lorenzo Bianconi [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZAZmUCBl+8LaoiAq@lore-desk \
--to=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo.bianconi@redhat.com \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox