On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 23:34 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > On Wed, Feb 11, 2009 at 10:27:44PM +0530, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2009-02-11 at 22:18 +0530, Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan wrote: > > > It is possible that some broken AP might send HT IEs in it's > > > assoc response even though the STA has not sent them in assoc req > > > when WEP/TKIP is used as pairwise cipher suite. Also it is important > > > to check this bit before enabling ht mode in beacon receive path. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Vasanthakumar Thiagarajan <vasanth@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > net/mac80211/mlme.c | 6 ++++-- > > > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/mac80211/mlme.c b/net/mac80211/mlme.c > > > index 169f10c..e7aafb0 100644 > > > --- a/net/mac80211/mlme.c > > > +++ b/net/mac80211/mlme.c > > > @@ -1532,7 +1532,8 @@ static void ieee80211_rx_mgmt_assoc_resp(struct ieee80211_sub_if_data *sdata, > > > elems.wmm_param_len); > > > > > > if (elems.ht_info_elem && elems.wmm_param && > > > - (ifsta->flags & IEEE80211_STA_WMM_ENABLED)) > > > + (ifsta->flags & IEEE80211_STA_WMM_ENABLED) && > > > + !(ifsta->flags & IEEE80211_STA_TKIP_WEP_USED)) > > > > Maybe we should have a separate flag for _REQUESTED_HT? I'm thinking > > here that possibly we might be adding more conditions under which we do > > not request HT? > > > > Otherwise, looks ok to me. > > That's right. We can even remove IEEE80211_STA_TKIP_WEP_USED if we > introduce a generic flag to enable ht, but this cleanup can be in a > separate patch. Thanks for the comments. Good point, if we identify another reason to disable HT later then we can just rename this flag. johannes
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
