On Wednesday 05 August 2009 00:23:23 gregor kowski wrote: > On 8/5/09, Michael Buesch <mb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wednesday 05 August 2009 00:03:11 gregor kowski wrote: > >> On 8/4/09, Michael Buesch <mb@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > On Tuesday 04 August 2009 23:54:42 gregor kowski wrote: > >> > > >> > You always talk about "bugs". What are these "bugs"? Is it just the > >> > wrong > >> > max_nr_keys assignment? That's trivial to fix. > >> > > >> So [1] is ok ? > > > > Could you answer my question? > That's [1]. But may be my description wasn't good. > I will try a new one. > we can have up to 50 pairwise keys (due to RCMTA and tkip stuff). > > In the case of new API : > - max_nr_keys is set to 58 > - in b43_key_clear we call do_key_write for index in [0 ... 58] > - in do_key_write we call keymac_write for index in [4 ... 58] > - in keymac_write write to RCMTA index [0 ... 54] > We write too much pairwise keys. > > - max_nr_keys is set to 58 > - b43_key_write generate pairwise keys in [sta_keys_start ... > max_nr_keys] = [0 ... 58] and call do_key_write > - in do_key_write we call keymac_write for index in [4 ... 58] > - in keymac_write write to RCMTA index [0 ... 54] > We write too much pairwise keys. Yeah, I do understand this bug. My question was if that is the only bug. > So max_nr_keys seems wrong in case of new API. It's not that simple, actually. The max_nr_keys thing was never meant to specify which API we're on. It was invented to do the RCMTA vs *oldcrappymechanismiforgotthenameof*. max_nr_keys essentially became obsolete and dead code when b43 did not support <rev5 anymore. I will submit a patch which removes it and cleans up the code alltogether. -- Greetings, Michael. -- 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
