linux-kernel - Re: Problems with regulatory domain support and BCM43224

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:16:40 +0200
From:	"Arend van Spriel" <arend@...adcom.com>
To:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <rodrigue@....qualcomm.com>,
	"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Michael Green" <green@....qualcomm.com>,
	"David Quan" <dquan@....qualcomm.com>,
	"Henry Ptasinski" <henry@...out.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problems with regulatory domain support and BCM43224

On 04/10/2012 06:28 PM, Seth Forshee wrote:
>> The patch builds, and kind of works. Scanning seems to be fine; I can
>> >  see all the APs I expect in my area, including the one on a DFS channel
>> >  that I couldn't see previously. I can associate with my 2.4 GHz APs, but
>> >  not the 5 GHz AP. I see timme outs waiting for probe responses, and I'm
>> >  hitting the WARN_ON_ONCE in brcms_c_wait_for_tx_completion(). I haven't
>> >  really debugged this yet -- I thought I'd send out the patch to collect
>> >  comments while I debug. Suggestions of what's causing this are also
>> >  welcome:)
> This was due to always passing true for the value of mute_tx to
> brcms_b_set_chanspec() on passive channels. For now I'm just always
> passing false, which looks like it ought to be okay as we shouldn't have
> any tx on passive channels unless beacons are seen on the channel.

Yes. I discovered this as well. Actually, I sent out a patch for some 
people to test it. I submitted a slightly different patch to John in 
which tx in unmuted upon receiving a beacon.

>> >  One of the major unresolved issues in the patch is what to do with the
>> >  data in struct locale_mimo_info. The regulatory rules only hold one
>> >  power level. I'm unsure why the brcmsmac implementation differs in this
>> >  regard. Suggestions?
> This is still one of the largest unsolved issues. I'm probably going to
> need some advice on how to fill out the txpwr information when
> regualtory rules external to the driver can be applied.
>

The power constraints for HT (covered by struct locale_mimo_info) are 
handled differently from non-HT. I have to confirm internally whether 
this is specific for our devices or actually needed to be compliant.

Gr. AvS

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/