| Message ID | E1TA0re-00059m-CD@debian64.localnet (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:19 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > Previously, it was not possible to connect > to networks which requires 11w to be supported > by the stations. If at all possible if we can do this without module parameters, that would be great. Otherwise how is userspace supposed to connect to a W-capable network without twiddling driver-specific module options, something we've tried really hard to not do? Module options really aren't any different than private ioctls or IWPRIV commands... Dan > Note: > > As all current (and old) firmwares corrupt > incoming, protected management frames, the > decryption offloading needs to be disabled. > > This can be done by loading the p54common > module with the nohwcrypt=1 parameter. > > Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com> > --- > v2->v3: > - fixed modparam_nohwcrypt typo > (Yes, v2 never compiled :( ) > > Regards, > Christian > --- > drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c | 11 +++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c > index 5e91ad0..8ab5aef 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c > @@ -739,6 +739,17 @@ struct ieee80211_hw *p54_init_common(size_t priv_data_len) > IEEE80211_HW_PS_NULLFUNC_STACK | > IEEE80211_HW_REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS; > > + if (modparam_nohwcrypt) { > + /* > + * Only support MFP, if the hardware crypto engine > + * is disabled, as the firmware's rx-path corrupts > + * incoming CCMP encrypted RX mgmt frames. > + * However, if no rx key is uploaded, the firmware > + * passes the unencrypted frame to the driver. > + */ > + dev->flags |= IEEE80211_HW_MFP_CAPABLE; > + } > + > dev->wiphy->interface_modes = BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) | > BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) | > BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP) | -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Friday 07 September 2012 18:51:04 Dan Williams wrote: > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:19 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > Previously, it was not possible to connect > > to networks which requires 11w to be supported > > by the stations. > > If at all possible if we can do this without module parameters, that > would be great. Hm, just a odd question. How does 11w work with TDLS and networks with mandatory 11w. So what happens if a station with 11w wants to connect to a station without over TDLS? So, do we need to have a MFP flag at a per-station level, or is it enough if we have it per-vif? Regards, Chr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> writes: > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:19 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: >> Previously, it was not possible to connect >> to networks which requires 11w to be supported >> by the stations. > > If at all possible if we can do this without module parameters, that > would be great. Otherwise how is userspace supposed to connect to a > W-capable network without twiddling driver-specific module options, > something we've tried really hard to not do? Module options really > aren't any different than private ioctls or IWPRIV commands... Sure, and that's how it works with properly supported hardware. But p54 is so old that the user will need to buy newer hardware if he really needs 11w support out-of-box. IMHO there's no point of making a huge effort to add 11w support to older hardware, there are more important things to fix in Linux wireless stack than that.
On Monday 10 September 2012 14:28:00 Kalle Valo wrote: > Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> writes: > > > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:19 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > >> Previously, it was not possible to connect > >> to networks which requires 11w to be supported > >> by the stations. > > > > If at all possible if we can do this without module parameters, that > > would be great. Otherwise how is userspace supposed to connect to a > > W-capable network without twiddling driver-specific module options, > > something we've tried really hard to not do? Module options really > > aren't any different than private ioctls or IWPRIV commands... > > Sure, and that's how it works with properly supported hardware. But p54 > is so old that the user will need to buy newer hardware if he really > needs 11w support out-of-box. IMHO there's no point of making a huge > effort to add 11w support to older hardware, there are more important > things to fix in Linux wireless stack than that. Dan's concern has been addressed by v4 of this patch (which depends on johannes' "add mgmt key flags" patch). p54 should now provide basic support for 11w protected networks w/o messing with any module parameters. Regards, Chr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, 2012-09-10 at 17:59 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > On Monday 10 September 2012 14:28:00 Kalle Valo wrote: > > Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com> writes: > > > > > On Tue, 2012-09-04 at 15:19 +0200, Christian Lamparter wrote: > > >> Previously, it was not possible to connect > > >> to networks which requires 11w to be supported > > >> by the stations. > > > > > > If at all possible if we can do this without module parameters, that > > > would be great. Otherwise how is userspace supposed to connect to a > > > W-capable network without twiddling driver-specific module options, > > > something we've tried really hard to not do? Module options really > > > aren't any different than private ioctls or IWPRIV commands... > > > > Sure, and that's how it works with properly supported hardware. But p54 > > is so old that the user will need to buy newer hardware if he really > > needs 11w support out-of-box. IMHO there's no point of making a huge > > effort to add 11w support to older hardware, there are more important > > things to fix in Linux wireless stack than that. > > Dan's concern has been addressed by v4 of this patch > (which depends on johannes' "add mgmt key flags" patch). > p54 should now provide basic support for 11w protected > networks w/o messing with any module parameters. Great, thanks! Dan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c b/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c index 5e91ad0..8ab5aef 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c @@ -739,6 +739,17 @@ struct ieee80211_hw *p54_init_common(size_t priv_data_len) IEEE80211_HW_PS_NULLFUNC_STACK | IEEE80211_HW_REPORTS_TX_ACK_STATUS; + if (modparam_nohwcrypt) { + /* + * Only support MFP, if the hardware crypto engine + * is disabled, as the firmware's rx-path corrupts + * incoming CCMP encrypted RX mgmt frames. + * However, if no rx key is uploaded, the firmware + * passes the unencrypted frame to the driver. + */ + dev->flags |= IEEE80211_HW_MFP_CAPABLE; + } + dev->wiphy->interface_modes = BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION) | BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_ADHOC) | BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP) |
Previously, it was not possible to connect to networks which requires 11w to be supported by the stations. Note: As all current (and old) firmwares corrupt incoming, protected management frames, the decryption offloading needs to be disabled. This can be done by loading the p54common module with the nohwcrypt=1 parameter. Signed-off-by: Christian Lamparter <chunkeey@googlemail.com> --- v2->v3: - fixed modparam_nohwcrypt typo (Yes, v2 never compiled :( ) Regards, Christian --- drivers/net/wireless/p54/main.c | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)