On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:56 PM, Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 11:45:38PM +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: >> On Tue, 2013-08-06 at 23:40 +0200, Sedat Dilek wrote: >> >> > > 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). >> >> > By reverting the culprit commit my network/wifi is fine, again. >> > See also attached patch with changelog. >> >> I think skb->protocol is probably getting set up wrong, and just putting >> back the last two lines >> >> skb->protocol = proto; >> skb->dev = dev; >> >> is probably sufficient to fix wifi. If skb->protocol isn't set to >> ETH_P_PAE, then we'd drop the packet in the wifi stack - might be worth >> printing out what it's set to at the point where the skb->protocol >> assignment above was removed. >> >> I'm trying to wrap my head around all this right now but I don't yet see >> how the code after the patch would not get skb->protocol correct. > > Has anybody tested plain ethernet? I have a malfunctioning dhclient on > ethernet since the weekend(it seems to not receive any packet). I did not > look after it because have other patches on my todo list currently. Maybe > it is the same error? > No, tested only with iwlwifi. Can you try the patch from [1]? - Sedat - [1] http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=137582524017840&w=2 > Greetings, > > Hannes > -- 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
