Re: athn(4) WPA2/WPA1 mixed-mode compat fix
Hello,
I've applied your diff and dhclient now works on my athn0 interface,
where it didn't work before.
The symptom was that it did get a link, but couldn't get a lease.
Thanks. Matej
On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 at 12:39, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>
> Similar to the urtwn(4) WPA1/TKIP fix I have just committed, there's
> a bug in athn(4) where the value of ni_rsncipher is used to guide the
> hardware- vs. software-crypto decision for multicast frames, not just
> for unicast frames as was intended.
>
> This means multicast frames could fail to decrypt if the AP is configured
> to use WPA1/TKIP instead of WPA2/CMMP as the group cipher (symptoms may
> include dhclient failing to get link).
>
> Ok?
>
> diff 89be218cf39e3311509e6aba9a8efd44b360a42f /usr/src
> blob - 560db09a447651b7bcabac7b94286a872b313ee2
> file + sys/dev/ic/ar5008.c
> --- sys/dev/ic/ar5008.c
> +++ sys/dev/ic/ar5008.c
> @@ -1003,7 +1003,8 @@ ar5008_rx_process(struct athn_softc *sc, struct mbuf_l
> (wh->i_fc[1] & IEEE80211_FC1_PROTECTED) &&
> (ic->ic_flags & IEEE80211_F_RSNON) &&
> (ni->ni_flags & IEEE80211_NODE_RXPROT) &&
> - (ni->ni_rsncipher == IEEE80211_CIPHER_CCMP ||
> + ((!IEEE80211_IS_MULTICAST(wh->i_addr1) &&
> + ni->ni_rsncipher == IEEE80211_CIPHER_CCMP) ||
> (IEEE80211_IS_MULTICAST(wh->i_addr1) &&
> ni->ni_rsngroupcipher == IEEE80211_CIPHER_CCMP))) {
> if (ar5008_ccmp_decap(sc, m, ni) != 0) {
>
>
>
Re: Scheduler with a single runqueue
On 6 July 2016 at 21:14, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > By using a single runqueue I prioritise latency over throughput. That > means your performance might degrade, but at least I can watch my HD > video while doing a "make -j4". I've been running your patch since you've posted it and haven't had any problems so far. I do get less audio stutter, which used to happen quite often when closing a tab in Chromium. Now it's hard to reproduce. My computer is an Asus laptop with the i7-2670QM and 8 GB RAM.
Re: [patch v3] cwm: Preserve stacking order during cycling
On 14 December 2015 at 22:37, Okan Demirmen wrote: > Hi - I haven't had spare cycles to look into this, nor the other recent > patches yet, but they have not been ignored. Oh no worries, and thanks to you! I was just wondering because they change cwm's behaviour, which might catch users off guard. But I have no idea how many people use it or how many would agree with the changes. And adding more options doesn't seem to be the OpenBSD way. Anyway, I don't really mind using it like I am now, I was simply interested. Thanks!
Re: [patch v3] cwm: Preserve stacking order during cycling
On 6 December 2015 at 15:15, Vadim Vygonets wrote: > Even when cycling in group, all visible windows should be > restacked. Patch version 3. Hello, will these patches eventually be commited to CVS? I really like this one. Matej
