netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 5/6] net: maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class module

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:   Tue, 18 Dec 2018 22:27:09 +0800
From:   Jian-Hong Pan <starnight@...cu.edu.tw>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alan Cox <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        linux-lpwan@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        "<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org\\" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>," <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Dollar Chen <dollar.chen@...ec.com>,
        Ken Yu <ken.yu@...wireless.com>,
        linux-wpan - ML <linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/6] net: maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class module

> Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:18:59AM CET, starnight@...cu.edu.tw wrote:
> >LoRaWAN defined by LoRa Alliance(TM) is the MAC layer over LoRa devices.
> >
> >This patch implements part of Class A end-devices SoftMAC defined in
> >LoRaWAN(TM) Specification Ver. 1.0.2:
> >1. End-device receive slot timing
> >2. Only single channel and single data rate for now
> >3. Unconfirmed data up/down message types
> >
> >On the other side, it defines the basic interface and operation
> >functions for compatible LoRa device drivers.
> >
> >Signed-off-by: Jian-Hong Pan <starnight@...cu.edu.tw>
> >---
> >V2:
> >- Split the LoRaWAN class module patch in V1 into LoRaWAN socket and
> >  LoRaWAN Soft MAC modules
> >- Modify for Big/Little-Endian
> >- Use SPDX license identifiers
> >
> >V3:
> >- Remove the decoration word - inline of the functions
> >- Order local variables from longest to shortest line in the functions
> >- Change the calling mac_cb function to lrw_get_mac_cb macro
> >
> >V4:
> >- Fix the delay period between RX window#1 and window#2
> >- Fix by coding style report from scripts/checkpatch.pl
> >
> >V5:
> >- Initial rx_skb_list when it is allocated with LoRa hardware
> >- Check the sk_buff's data length before access it
> >- Deal FPort field and decrypt payload in lrw_parse_frame function
> >- Drop the recieved frame if parse failed
> >- Fix the bug which passes wrong skb properties from maclorawan to lorawan module
> >
> > net/maclorawan/Kconfig  |  14 +
> > net/maclorawan/Makefile |   2 +
> > net/maclorawan/mac.c    | 555 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > net/maclorawan/main.c   | 606 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 4 files changed, 1177 insertions(+)
> > create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/Kconfig
> > create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/Makefile
> > create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/mac.c
> > create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/main.c
>
>
> I don't get it. In patch "Add LoRaWAN API declaration for LoRa devices"
> you add headers for "API" and here you implement functions. That is just
> weird. Does it mean you can have other implementations?

LoRaWAN defined by LoRa Alliance(TM) is the MAC layer over LoRa PHY.
This part is soft-MAC as Andreas mentioned
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-lpwan/2018-December/000010.html

> Also, you don't really have any user of this API in the set. Please
> introduce at least 1 driver, preferably more (I see that Andreas has
> multiple ones in his patchset). You cannot push kernel infrastructure
> without kernel user.

The soft-MAC is suitable for the LoRa chips' device drivers, like
sx1276/77/78/79, RFM95/96/97/98W ...
Still waiting for Andreas' sx1276 version 2 patch and more discussion.
For example, how to make PF_LORA and PF_LORAWAN like Ethernet, PF_INET
and PF_INET6 don't need separate devices either, both use eth0.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/3/266

Jian-Hong Pan