netdev - Re: Is this 32-bit NCM?y

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 4 Dec 2014 10:53:49 +0100 (CET)
From:	Enrico Mioso <mrkiko.rs@...il.com>
To:	Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
cc:	Kevin Zhu <Mingying.Zhu@...iocodes.com>,
	Eli Britstein <Eli.Britstein@...iocodes.com>,
	Alex Strizhevsky <alexxst@...il.com>,
	Midge Shaojun Tan <ShaojunMidge.Tan@...iocodes.com>,
	"youtux@...il.com" <youtux@...il.com>,
	"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Is this 32-bit NCM?y

Guys!
Don't forget I can test it - since I have a remote machine with 3.16 kernel 
and the device, at least for now.
So - Bjorn: do I need just to disable padding or do I need also to perform some 
other changes? I am sorry if I ask this a little bit stupidly, but I was 
alittle bit busy here.





On Thu, 4 Dec 2014, Bjørn Mork wrote:

> Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2014 10:19:11
> From: Bjørn Mork <bjorn@...k.no>
> To: Kevin Zhu <Mingying.Zhu@...iocodes.com>
> Cc: Enrico Mioso <mrkiko.rs@...il.com>,
>     Eli Britstein <Eli.Britstein@...iocodes.com>,
>     Alex Strizhevsky <alexxst@...il.com>,
>     Midge Shaojun Tan <ShaojunMidge.Tan@...iocodes.com>,
>     "youtux@...il.com" <youtux@...il.com>,
>     "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
>     "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: Is this 32-bit NCM?y
> 
> Kevin Zhu <Mingying.Zhu@...iocodes.com> writes:
>
>> Guys,
>>
>> After rearranging the padding, putting NCM0 right after NTH, and disable
>> ARP (FLAG_NOARP) and handling the offset alignment issue, it seems it
>> begins to work, though there's still problem with DHCP.
>
> Great!  But it would be good to know if _one_ of these changes is enough
> to make it work.
>
>> The DHCP packet's size becomes a large one after the TX function, which
>> is 16384, the maximum.
>
> You can now (from v3.16) disable the padding by setting min_tx_pkt >= tx_max.
> Something like this should do for a simple test:
>
> echo 16384 >/sys/class/net/wwan0/cdc_ncm/min_tx_pkt
>
>
> Bjørn
>