Return-path: Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:35282 "EHLO mail-pf0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1034113AbcIZMVR (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Sep 2016 08:21:17 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f175.google.com with SMTP id s13so31052846pfd.2 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2016 05:21:17 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: implement more accurate skb tracking To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= References: <20160926102348.8695-1-zajec5@gmail.com> <09084e8b-829d-9a13-ae16-a493438216ac@broadcom.com> Cc: Kalle Valo , Franky Lin , Hante Meuleman , Pieter-Paul Giesberts , Franky Lin , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER" , Network Development , Linux Kernel Mailing List , =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= From: Arend Van Spriel Message-ID: (sfid-20160926_142138_565173_4D1907FA) Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:20:59 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 26-9-2016 14:13, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > On 26 September 2016 at 13:46, Arend Van Spriel > wrote: >> On 26-9-2016 12:23, Rafał Miłecki wrote: >>> From: Rafał Miłecki >>> >>> We need to track 802.1x packets to know if there are any pending ones >>> for transmission. This is required for performing key update in the >>> firmware. >> >> The problem we are trying to solve is a pretty old one. The problem is >> that wpa_supplicant uses two separate code paths: EAPOL messaging >> through data path and key configuration though nl80211. > > Can I find it described/reported somewhere? Not sure. It is something that I recall from working at Intersil so back in the prism days. Regards, Arend >>> Unfortunately our old tracking code wasn't very accurate. It was >>> treating skb as pending as soon as it was passed by the netif. Actual >>> handling packet to the firmware was happening later as brcmfmac >>> internally queues them and uses its own worker(s). >> >> That does not seem right. As soon as we get a 1x packet we need to wait >> with key configuration regardless whether it is still in the driver or >> handed over to firmware already. > > OK, thanks. >