> That wasn't my point. My point was that the kernel code trusts the validity > of the firmware image, in the sense of e.g. this piece:
>> + no_of_files = *(u32 *)&fw_packed->data[0]; > If the firmware file was corrupted (intentionally/maliciously or not), this > could now be say 0xffffffff. Thanks for the clarification, We will submit next patch with additional validations to this > What are your reasons for piggy-backing on 2.4 GHz? Just practical "it's > there and we don't care"? As the LiFi is not standardised yet we are using the existing wireless frameworks. For now piggy-backing with 2.4GHz is seamless for users. We will undertake band and other wider change once IEEE 802.11bb is standardised. Thanks Srini
