Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:48153 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753746AbbI3GrA (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Sep 2015 02:47:00 -0400 Message-ID: <1443595615.1859.2.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20150930_084704_436063_29E59D80) Subject: Re: Can we ignore frames with invalid BSSID in IBSS mode? From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , ath10k Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 08:46:55 +0200 In-Reply-To: <5605D228.7050609@candelatech.com> (sfid-20150926_010105_789618_F93D668E) References: <5605D228.7050609@candelatech.com> (sfid-20150926_010105_789618_F93D668E) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 2015-09-25 at 16:00 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > It seems that ath10k ar988X hardware has a bug where the BSSID > for IBSS AMSDU frames is all zeros. The 'main' 636 ath10k firmware > does not seem to use AMSDUs for IBSS, and when I enable it in my CT > firmware, then I see the breakage. So, I suspect it is not > just a simple software/firmware bug. > > If I simply ignore the bssid_match check in ieee80211_accept_frame, > then it seems everything runs fine. > > So, I'm curious if anyone knows what sorts of bad things could happen > if the bssid_match check is ignored? Maybe bcast/mcast frames could > be accepted when they shouldn't be in certain cases? > You could end up accepting multicast frames from a different, overlapping, BSS? Seems like a bad idea. johannes