On Wed, 2015-09-30 at 08:07 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > On 09/29/2015 11:46 PM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > 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. > > It's definitely not a great idea. > > In my testing, I always see the first frame of the AMPDU have > a proper IBSS BSSID. Any idea if it would be OK (and even possible) > for the driver or stack to detect this and save the BSSID aside > for the subsequent frames? That seems reasonable. > Its not clear to me whether the rest of the AMPDU frames could > somehow be interleaved with frames from a different BSSID? > They can't be, at least not without some very strange hacks on the transmitter. johannes -- 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
