netdev - Re: [PATCH wpan-next 01/20] net: mac802154: Allow the creation of coordinator interfaces

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]

Message-ID: <CAK-6q+gW=s=tWBrkN=CaiyoLM8kqeF0iRuS21AqDMQdQcE9H5A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 3 Sep 2022 10:31:37 -0400
From:   Alexander Aring <aahringo@...hat.com>
To:     Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>,
        Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
        linux-wpan - ML <linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Girault <david.girault@...vo.com>,
        Romuald Despres <romuald.despres@...vo.com>,
        Frederic Blain <frederic.blain@...vo.com>,
        Nicolas Schodet <nico@...fr.eu.org>,
        Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH wpan-next 01/20] net: mac802154: Allow the creation of
 coordinator interfaces

Hi,

On Sat, Sep 3, 2022 at 10:20 AM Alexander Aring <aahringo@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 8:08 PM Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> ...
> > >
> > > I am sorry, I never looked into Zephyr for reasons... Do they not have
> > > something like /proc/interrupts look if you see a counter for your
> > > 802.15.4 transceiver?
> > >
> > > > Also, can you please clarify when are we talking about software and
> > > > when about hardware filters.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hardware filter is currently e.g. promiscuous mode on or off setting.
> > > Software filtering is depending which receive path the frame is going
> > > and which hardware filter is present which then acts like actually
> > > with hardware filtering.
> > > I am not sure if this answers this question?
> >
> > I think my understand gets clearer now that I've digged into Zephyr's
> > ieee802154 layer and in the at86rf230 datasheet.
> >
>
> okay, I think for zephyr questions you are here on the wrong mailinglist.
>
> > I will answer the previous e-mail but just for not I wanted to add that
> > I managed to get Zephyr working, I had to mess around in the code a
> > little bit and actually I discovered a net command which is necessary
> > to use in order to turn the iface up, whatever.
> >
>
> aha.
>
> > So I was playing with the atusb devices and I _think_ I've found a
> > firmware bug or a hardware bug which is going to be problematic. In
>
> the firmware is open source, I think it's fine to send patches here (I
> did it as well once for do a quick hack to port it to rzusb) the atusb
> is "mostly" at the point that they can do open hardware from the
> qi-hardware organization.
>
> > iface.c, when creating the interface, if you set the hardware filters
> > (set_panid/short/ext_addr()) there is no way you will be able to get a
> > fully transparent promiscuous mode. I am not saying that the whole
>
> What is a transparent promiscuous mode?
>
> > promiscuous mode does not work anymore, I don't really know. What I was
> > interested in were the acks, and getting them is a real pain. At least,
> > enabling the promiscuous mode after setting the hw filters will lead to
> > the acks being dropped immediately while if the promiscuous mode is
> > enabled first (like on monitor interfaces) the acks are correctly
> > forwarded by the PHY.
>
> If we would not disable AACK handling (means we receive a frame with
> ack requested bit set we send a ack back) we would ack every frame it
> receives (speaking on at86rf233).
>
> >
> > While looking at the history of the drivers, I realized that the
> > TX_ARET mode was not supported by the firmware in 2015 (that's what you
>
> There exists ARET and AACK, both are mac mechanisms which must be
> offloaded on the hardware. Note that those only do "something" if the
> ack request bit in the frame is set.
>
> ARET will retransmit if no ack is received after some while, etc.
> mostly coupled with CSMA/CA handling. We cannot guarantee such timings
> on the Linux layer. btw: mac80211 can also not handle acks on the
> software layer, it must be offloaded.
>
> AACK will send a back if a frame with ack request bit was received.

will send an ack back*

- Alex