On 5/22/20 8:46 AM, Rui Salvaterra wrote:
Hi, Kalle,
On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 12:49, Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
And did the "bad" performance even have any real visible changes to the
user? IMHO this "bad" performance is small price to pay from getting
WPA3 supported out-of-box, especially when the data throughput is
unaffected.
I agree, I also believe the additional security provided by WPA3 is
more important. The CPU overhead impact exists and is measurable but,
to be honest, I didn't notice any worse performance while browsing the
web, for example (which is already slow enough on a G4 CPU, as you can
imagine).
Rui,
Does this one-line
patch work for WPA3 without setting the nohwcrypt option?
diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/main.c
b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/main.c
index 39da1a4c30ac..3ad94dad2d89 100644
--- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/main.c
+++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/b43/main.c
@@ -5569,7 +5569,7 @@ static struct b43_wl *b43_wireless_init(struct b43_bus_dev
*dev)
/* fill hw info */
ieee80211_hw_set(hw, RX_INCLUDES_FCS);
ieee80211_hw_set(hw, SIGNAL_DBM);
-
+ ieee80211_hw_set(hw, MFP_CAPABLE);
hw->wiphy->interface_modes =
BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP) |
BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_MESH_POINT) |
Larry
