Subject: Re: CVS commit: src/sys/net80211
To: None <email@example.com>
From: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 08/16/2005 02:23:21
In article <20050816021259.101BF2DA27@cvs.netbsd.org>,
David Young <email@example.com> wrote:
>Module Name: src
>Committed By: dyoung
>Date: Tue Aug 16 02:12:59 UTC 2005
> src/sys/net80211: ieee80211_output.c
>Fix previous patch for non-crypto operation: test for a NULL key
>before testing the key flags.
>XXX Problems remain. Nick Hudson points out my questionable
>XXX M_COPY_PKTHDR usage. Also, it seems to me that we may not be
>XXX protected against writing a read-only mbuf during the crypto
>XXX encapsulation stage, even if hardware does the actual crypto.
There is also the questionably usage of m_pullup and M_PREPEND in
the code. Yes, the code makes sure that there is adequate space
so that neither M_PREPEND or m_pullup will need to allocate a new
mbuf, but this is not guaranteed (their implementation might change).
I think that we either should change the api to pass an mbuf ** so
that changes are propagated, or add KASSERTS to the code.