On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 16:41 +0530, Mohammed Shafi wrote: > On Tue, Feb 1, 2011 at 6:19 PM, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > > > > At least the WMM spec says we should reply to > > unicast probe request frames that go to us. > > > > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > net/mac80211/ibss.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > --- wireless-testing.orig/net/mac80211/ibss.c 2011-02-01 12:58:16.000000000 +0100 > > +++ wireless-testing/net/mac80211/ibss.c 2011-02-01 13:47:44.000000000 +0100 > > @@ -689,7 +689,7 @@ static void ieee80211_rx_mgmt_probe_req( > > mgmt->bssid, tx_last_beacon); > > #endif /* CONFIG_MAC80211_IBSS_DEBUG */ > > > > - if (!tx_last_beacon) > > + if (!tx_last_beacon && !(status->rx_flags & IEEE80211_RX_RA_MATCH)) > > return; > > > > if (memcmp(mgmt->bssid, ifibss->bssid, ETH_ALEN) != 0 && > > Hi Johannes, > tested with the same thing (in addition of passing the > rx_status structure) and it is working fine. Yeah, I clearly missed that, guess I wasn't paying attention. The real question though is -- do we want/need this? I can only find reference to this behaviour in the WMM spec. 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
