Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: detect & reject faked packet generated by a
 firmware
To: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <rafal@milecki.pl>
References: <20180130090922.30346-1-zajec5@gmail.com>
 <5A705741.6050402@broadcom.com> <44f66f2254e7a5950ec32068b31d7b54@milecki.pl>
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>,
        Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>,
        Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>,
        Chi-Hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@cypress.com>,
        Wright Feng <wright.feng@cypress.com>,
        Pieter-Paul Giesberts <pieter-paul.giesberts@broadcom.com>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
        brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com, brcm80211-dev-list@cypress.com
From: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>
Message-ID: <5A71CBF5.9020300@broadcom.com> (sfid-20180131_150037_602956_D3F012D1)
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2018 15:00:21 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <44f66f2254e7a5950ec32068b31d7b54@milecki.pl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On 1/31/2018 2:11 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>   void brcmf_netif_rx(struct brcmf_if *ifp, struct sk_buff *skb)
>>>   {
>>> +    if (!brcmf_is_valid_skb(skb)) {
>>> +        brcmu_pkt_buf_free_skb(skb);
>>
>> Maybe we should add a driver stat for this although I better have a
>> look into the root cause of this.
>
> It seems there are following stats fields we can use:
> 1) rx_errors
> 2) rx_dropped
> 3) rx_length_errors
> 4) rx_over_errors
> 5) rx_crc_errors
> 6) rx_frame_errors
> 7) rx_fifo_errors
> 8) rx_missed_errors
>
> Which one do you think may fit this case the best?

Those are actually netdev stats, right? Not sure I want to have those, 
but if any I would say 3) fits best.

Regards,
Arend