On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 09:47:01PM +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:32 PM, Sedat Dilek <sedat.dilek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 21:14 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >>> On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 9:08 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >>> > On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 20:35 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: > >>> > > >>> >> Attached is a diff comparing all new commits in next-20130805. > >>> >> If one of the commits smells bad to you, please let me know. > >>> > > >>> > Out of that list, only the af_packet changes would seem to have any > >>> > impact on wireless at all. > >>> > > >>> > >>> git-bisecting... 2 steps to go... > >>> > >>> This one is bad... "af_packet: simplify VLAN frame check in packet_snd" > >>> > >>> http://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/?id=c483e02614551e44ced3fe6eedda8e36d3277ccc > >> > >> That seems weird, does reverting it fix it? > >> > > > > [ TO Phil Sutter ] > > > > This was 3/3 of af_packet patches :-). > > > > So, the culprit commit is... > > > > 0f75b09c798ed00c30d7d5551b896be883bc2aeb is the first bad commit > > commit 0f75b09c798ed00c30d7d5551b896be883bc2aeb > > Author: Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> > > Date: Fri Aug 2 11:37:39 2013 +0200 > > > > af_packet: when sending ethernet frames, parse header for skb->protocol > > > > This may be necessary when the SKB is passed to other layers on the go, > > which check the protocol field on their own. An example is a VLAN packet > > sent out using AF_PACKET on a bridge interface. The bridging code checks > > the SKB size, accounting for any VLAN header only if the protocol field > > is set accordingly. > > > > Note that eth_type_trans() sets skb->dev to the passed argument, so this > > can be skipped in packet_snd() for ethernet frames, as well. > > > > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@xxxxxx> > > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > :040000 040000 af403a20a321517f6cfb51d2e22c17ca5a60e947 > > 1f302ebd62a87b9e874a3e61203499e17d6fce3c M net > > > > - Sedat - > > [ net/packet/af_packet.c ] > ... > #include <linux/if_arp.h> > > $ find include/ -name if_arp.h > include/uapi/linux/if_arp.h > include/linux/if_arp.h > > $ LC_ALL=C ll include/uapi/linux/if_arp.h include/linux/if_arp.h > -rw-r--r-- 1 wearefam wearefam 1560 Jul 11 19:42 include/linux/if_arp.h > -rw-r--r-- 1 wearefam wearefam 6344 Jul 26 12:36 include/uapi/linux/if_arp.h > > $ grep ARPHRD_ETHER include/linux/if_arp.h include/uapi/linux/if_arp.h > include/uapi/linux/if_arp.h:#define ARPHRD_ETHER 1 > /* Ethernet 10Mbps */ > > Wrong include? Nope, <linux/if_arp.h> includes <uapi/linux/if_arp.h>. I suppose there is a semantical problem here. Did you verify your bisect by reverting just the three patches? Does the problem occur on client or server side? AFAICT, hostapd as well as wpa_supplicant use AF_PACKET. The tricky thing is, these patches are meant to *loosen* the restrictions in af_packet.c, so *should* not be harmful. So either my patches create a side effect I did not foresee, or it's something nasty (too much delay introduced by calling eth_type_trans() or so). Could you please provide steps on how to reproduce the faulty behaviour? Best wishes, Phil -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
