Return-path: Received: from mail-vc0-f179.google.com ([209.85.220.179]:53938 "EHLO mail-vc0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751485Ab3HUJAs (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Aug 2013 05:00:48 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ht10so93787vcb.24 for ; Wed, 21 Aug 2013 02:00:47 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1377074351.15268.7.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> References: <1377020479-16935-1-git-send-email-k.eugene.e@gmail.com> <1377020479-16935-2-git-send-email-k.eugene.e@gmail.com> <1377032397.13829.40.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> <1377074351.15268.7.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2013 11:00:47 +0200 Message-ID: (sfid-20130821_110053_500315_FDABCC34) Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/16] wcn36xx: Add main.c From: Eugene Krasnikov To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless , wcn36xx@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > [remove wcn list, it annoys me with moderator messages] Sorry for that, now should be fixed. >> >> + if (IEEE80211_KEY_FLAG_PAIRWISE & key_conf->flags) { >> >> + sta_priv->is_data_encrypted = true; >> >> + /* Reconfigure bss with encrypt_type */ >> >> + if (NL80211_IFTYPE_STATION == vif->type) >> >> + wcn36xx_smd_config_bss(wcn, >> >> + vif, >> >> + sta, >> >> + sta->addr, >> >> + true); >> > >> > It seems to me this should not be here but you should have mac80211 set >> > something in e.g. bss_conf that indicates encryption? >> > >> >> It's a good idea and I tried to find anything encryption related in >> bss_conf but without luck. I do not like this line myself so I would >> really appreciate if you can point where exactly in >> bss_conf/bss_info_changed information about encryption is located. > > There isn't anything, but you could always add it. Aha, ok will add this to my todo list:) >> >> + static const u32 cipher_suites[] = { >> >> + WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_TKIP, >> >> + WLAN_CIPHER_SUITE_CCMP, >> >> + }; >> > >> > You actually don't want to support WEP, not even in software? Otherwise >> > just leave this out and mac80211 will add it. >> >> WEP is supported by HW but wcn36xx does not configure it yet. Is that >> ok to add HW WEP encryption in nearest future after wcn36xx is pushed >> to upstream? > > I don't see why you'd even bother - why not just use software encryption > for WEP for the time being? Then you don't need this code. Because if I add something I test it, and that will take the same amount of time as to add HW WEP ;) Let me add HW WEP since it's faster then SW WEP. >> >> + wcn->hw->wiphy->iface_combinations = &if_comb; >> >> + wcn->hw->wiphy->n_iface_combinations = 1; >> > >> > Your code with "wcn->current_vif = " etc. *really* doesn't look like you >> > support combinations. Are you positive this is OK? >> >> So far wcn36xx supports only one interface at once. But in the nearest >> future it will definitely support more than one. So how about keeping >> this for future?;) > > It's *wrong* though - you're saying two interfaces are supported and > then they aren't. Don't do that. You are right. Will remove this for now. -- Best regards, Eugene