From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2013 10:07:15 +0200
Subject: [ath9k-devel] [PATCH 7/7] ath10k: strip protected flag
In-Reply-To: <87mwsglaao.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
References: <1366965448-8390-1-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com>
	<1366965448-8390-8-git-send-email-michal.kazior@tieto.com>
	<87mwsglaao.fsf@kamboji.qca.qualcomm.com>
Message-ID: <517F7BB3.6050200@tieto.com>
List-Id: <ath9k-devel.lists.ath9k.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: ath9k-devel@lists.ath9k.org

On 30/04/13 09:58, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com> writes:
>
>> We already do decryption and all crypto
>> verification in HW. mac80211 tries to verify CCMP
>> for fragmented rx and fails without this patch.
>>
>> This fixes fragmented rx on CCMP networks.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Kazior <michal.kazior@tieto.com>
>
> [...]
>
>> -	if (info->encrypt_type != HTT_RX_MPDU_ENCRYPT_NONE)
>> +	if (info->encrypt_type != HTT_RX_MPDU_ENCRYPT_NONE) {
>>   		status->flag |= RX_FLAG_DECRYPTED | RX_FLAG_IV_STRIPPED |
>>   				RX_FLAG_MMIC_STRIPPED;
>> +		hdr->frame_control = __cpu_to_le16(
>> +				__le16_to_cpu(hdr->frame_control) &
>> +				~IEEE80211_FCTL_PROTECTED);
>> +	}
>
> This looks ugly. Is this a bug in mac80211 which we just workaround in
> ath10k? Isn't there any other way to fix this? At least this deserves a
> big comment in the code to explain why we are doing this.
>
> I'll apply this anyway, but we need to discuss more about this.

I'm not quite sure whether this is an issue in mac80211 or we should be 
actually stripping the protected flag. b43 driver seems to strip the 
flag as well.

mac80211 seems to want to do some extra checks for CCMP in fragmented rx 
data path. Perhaps it shouldn't?


-- Pozdrawiam / Best regards, Michal Kazior.