From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C65FC433E0 for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:42:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58F7F64DFF for ; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:42:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230332AbhBPWmG (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 17:42:06 -0500 Received: from m42-2.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.2]:37272 "EHLO m42-2.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229927AbhBPWmF (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 17:42:05 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1613515301; h=Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: MIME-Version: Sender; bh=0YLpehCcwqH+i7w9iHB1W1poqAYgJCfaz7LTVz2vGs8=; b=BpgcO2AfhHk/Z3e1zqbtb2SUIMP0bT1aI+5+bsp3P8CdIB7HqTF0CXsMVp5+elrYQJ35FqFJ 8Bsr1QBZFC07SG3Vg1jSyNPdcY38/8Ep7A7NeN/jQAERWB0kmIpk5ibNdbcgcAlESRYN2AMB 3oMq/spw+AAYk+aXfZnkzJ+CaEU= X-Mailgun-Sending-Ip: 69.72.42.2 X-Mailgun-Sid: WyI3YTAwOSIsICJsaW51eC13aXJlbGVzc0B2Z2VyLmtlcm5lbC5vcmciLCAiYmU5ZTRhIl0= Received: from smtp.codeaurora.org (ec2-35-166-182-171.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.166.182.171]) by smtp-out-n02.prod.us-west-2.postgun.com with SMTP id 602c4a042d3aa2c7080bfb45 (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:41:08 GMT Sender: alokad=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 79977C433C6; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:41:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.codeaurora.org (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: alokad) by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D6587C433CA; Tue, 16 Feb 2021 22:41:07 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2021 14:41:07 -0800 From: Aloka Dixit To: Johannes Berg Cc: Arend van Spriel , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] nl80211: Commands for FILS discovery and unsolicited broadcast probe response In-Reply-To: <9d9cc5bc50629090375b185a3af2546e506c22d9.camel@sipsolutions.net> References: <20210120005229.32582-1-alokad@codeaurora.org> <20210120005229.32582-2-alokad@codeaurora.org> <430f10a576b8490f73827f800c87f58c@codeaurora.org> (sfid-20210125_225531_667698_384A7632) <9d9cc5bc50629090375b185a3af2546e506c22d9.camel@sipsolutions.net> Message-ID: <2fbdef8397607839c73fab66dd05c3c5@codeaurora.org> X-Sender: alokad@codeaurora.org User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/1.3.9 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On 2021-02-12 01:33, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Mon, 2021-01-25 at 13:52 -0800, Aloka Dixit wrote: >> >> FILS discovery and especially unsolicited probe response templates are >> big. Sometimes send_and_recv() returns error due to memory >> unavailability during wpa_driver_nl80211_set_ap() depending on how >> many >> interfaces, which elements are added. > > What? Where do you get errors from? Netlink even supports vmalloc now, > I > believe, so the kernel really shouldn't care? > The error was shown on hostapd side during attribute building when 16 interfaces were added on one radio and unsolicited broadcast probe response feature was enabled. It was resolved with a separate command for this feature instead of being a part of NL80211_CMD_START_AP. >> Moving these to separate commands >> resolves this issue along with more control over the time interval >> during run-time. > > I tend to agree with Arend though, we have NL80211_CMD_SET_BEACON and > since NL80211_CMD_NEW_BEACON was renamed to NL80211_CMD_START_AP to > more > accurately say what it does, I think generalizing "AP modifications" by > renaming NL80211_CMD_SET_BEACON to NL80211_CMD_UPDATE_AP (or such) > would > make a lot of sense. > > Let's not conflate the two issues here. > > 1) memory issues - need to understand better > > 2) update is needed - I'd say SET_BEACON/UPDATE_AP would be a better > way > than pulling everything into separate commands. Updates can be > partial too, after all, if you include only the changed attributes, > and that might even address case 1? I.e. why wouldn't userspace be > able to do UPDATE_AP multiple times, just like with your patch it > would do NL80211_CMD_SET_FILS_DISCOVERY > and NL80211_CMD_SET_UNSOL_BCAST_PROBE_RESP? > > > Also, technically this constitutes an API break. One that perhaps > nobody > cares about yet, but surely somebody already has hostapd versions that > use NL80211_ATTR_FILS_DISCOVERY or NL80211_ATTR_UNSOL_BCAST_PROBE_RESP? > After all, you don't want to tell me you never tested this code ;-) > > johannes I myself added the hostapd changes corresponding to the original kernel code, This patch-set doesn't remove these attributes so, if accepted, current hostapd calls will become no-op but won't break any other functionality until I send the next version for separate commands for hostapd. On a different note, a line was missed in nl80211_fils_discovery_policy definition from my side in the original change so included it in this patch-set. Should I send a separate patch for that while we discuss regarding the separate command? Thanks.