On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 at 20:59, Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 6/19/2018 10:25 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > > On 2018-06-19 22:01, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >> On 6/19/2018 5:48 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote: > >>> From: Rafał Miłecki <rafal@xxxxxxxxxx> > >>> > >>> After a bit long discussions in various e-mail threads I'm coming with > >>> this simple & small patchset. It isn't complete support for monitor mode > >>> but just a pair of preparing patches that should be clear & well > >>> discussed by now to make them acceptable. > >>> > >>> The main missing bit is code setting MONITOR_FMT_RADIOTAP which I expect > >>> Arend to handle soon, as he already has a patch using "sta_monitor" > >>> iovar for that. Then we have to discuss a flag for marking firmwares > >>> which are capable for tagging monitor frames. > >>> > >>> While still incomplete, I believe that with my previous patches, we can > >>> agree this is a good direction. > >>> > >>> Arend: if you find these 2 patches OK, could you ack them, to make it > >>> clear for Kalle if they look OK now (or not yet)? I'd be great if you > >>> could sent your "sta_monitor" work on top of this. > >> > >> I acked them and I will submit my changes later. Either after these > >> are applied or simply indicate the dependency. > >> > >> Now as for where we are with this. With what we have here we know > >> firmware can monitor packets with and without radiotap. However, we do > >> not have an indication whether firmware can transport these monitor > >> packets to the host. What I need to look into next is whether the > >> 802.11 flag in msgbuf is linked to a particular version of the > >> protocol, but we may need to resort to the fwid table. > > > > Being able to detect if firmware tags monitor packets would be great. > > The 802.11 tag as opposed the 802.3 tag is specified in the PCIe host > interface spec. The brcmfmac driver support rev 5 and 6 of that spec and > both specify the tags. I did some digging and I believe it is safe to > say that firmware that includes the "monitor" tag in the "cap" iovar > does support these packets tags as well. OK, this is nice. The problem is we still need some fallback for the old firmwares. Only the newest ones specify "monitor" tag in the "cap" iovar. Older firmwares don't specify it but they still may include support for monitor mode and radiotap header. > Unfortunately, the > BRCMF_C_MONITOR command support does not guarantee. So I just sent a > patch to remove the fall-back mechanism for detecting monitor mode support. -- Rafał
