Return-path: Received: from mail-qw0-f46.google.com ([209.85.216.46]:44847 "EHLO mail-qw0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754131Ab0IMCfU convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:35:20 -0400 Received: by qwh6 with SMTP id 6so3123060qwh.19 for ; Sun, 12 Sep 2010 19:35:19 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <201009131017.35762.br1@einfach.org> References: <20100908070427.11255.17659.stgit@tt-desk> <20100908070459.11255.52256.stgit@tt-desk> <20100911172752.GH20385@hash.localnet> <201009131017.35762.br1@einfach.org> Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 22:35:19 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [ath5k-devel] [PATCH 6/8] ath5k: Use common crypt capabilities flags From: Bob Copeland To: Bruno Randolf Cc: bob@bobcopeland.com, ath5k-devel@lists.ath5k.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linville@tuxdriver.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sun, Sep 12, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Bruno Randolf wrote: > On Sun September 12 2010 02:27:52 you wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 08, 2010 at 04:04:59PM +0900, Bruno Randolf wrote: >> > Replace ah_aes_support and ah_combined_mic with common ath_crypt_caps >> > ATH_CRYPT_CAP_CIPHER_AESCCM and ATH_CRYPT_CAP_MIC_COMBINED. >> > >> > Signed-off-by: Bruno Randolf >> > >> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/base.c >> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ath/ath5k/base.c >> > @@ -3298,7 +3298,7 @@ ath5k_set_key(struct ieee80211_hw *hw, enum >> > set_key_cmd cmd, >> > >> > ? ? case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_TKIP: >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? break; >> > >> > ? ? case WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_CCMP: >> > - ? ? ? ? ? if (sc->ah->ah_aes_support) >> > + ? ? ? ? ? if (common->crypt_caps & ATH_CRYPT_CAP_CIPHER_AESCCM) >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? break; >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? return -EOPNOTSUPP; >> >> This could be done by the common code too, right? > > yes... ath9k doesn't do this, but i left the old code because i wasn't sure if > we need it or not. can we sort this out in a following patch? Yeah, I guess only certain ath5k chipsets do CCMP while all ath9k ones do.. for sure, follow-up patches are fine for my minor comments, none of them affect functionality. -- Bob Copeland %% www.bobcopeland.com