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 E17B4C433DB for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B366D64EC9 for ; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:42:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231789AbhBVWmJ (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 17:42:09 -0500 Received: from m42-2.mailgun.net ([69.72.42.2]:62272 "EHLO m42-2.mailgun.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231723AbhBVWlz (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 17:41:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; v=1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mg.codeaurora.org; q=dns/txt; s=smtp; t=1614033706; h=Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Subject: Cc: To: From: Date: Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type: MIME-Version: Sender; bh=hFjUAOZ7u63AI9ublwtyX5L63eqbhEid0wjw6PbzIbY=; b=Ix5BuVoIPdd2Oiq65aPYCIdj5SRgp5qPoE/RR280y7ZPSq2aNbzGXJc5xRHFO9IUqeUYvz2R WBolyl0Ht0ZXsXA/hPMj0OvXswRQ7zqGff0w6DjYxuLX3d8s5lapEIUO8VKEVvL88oM6khZC Q8VLqHdTi7hrRHGGerp8JyZe8G0= 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-n03.prod.us-east-1.postgun.com with SMTP id 603432fee87943df306edb4b (version=TLS1.2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256); Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:41:02 GMT Sender: alokad=codeaurora.org@mg.codeaurora.org Received: by smtp.codeaurora.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id A7ADCC433ED; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:41:01 +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 595F8C433C6; Mon, 22 Feb 2021 22:41:01 +0000 (UTC) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2021 14:41:01 -0800 From: Aloka Dixit To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 0/4] mac80211: add multiple bssid support In-Reply-To: References: <20210120005120.32424-1-alokad@codeaurora.org> (sfid-20210120_015542_749517_52354F67) Message-ID: <64f490e2a559a0ed33c59d0fc7326582@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 01:59, Johannes Berg wrote: > Hi, > >> John Crispin (4): >> nl80211: add basic multiple bssid support >> mac80211: add multiple bssid support to interface handling >> mac80211: add multiple bssid/EMA support to beacon handling >> mac80211: CSA on non-transmitting interfaces > > As much as I hate to send this back to you ... > > I don't understand how you can not have an nl80211 feature flag for AP- > side multi-BSSID support, yet have a mac80211-level feature flag? > > For STA side we could get away with it because we present all the BSSes > in cfg80211's scan results, and even a version of wpa_supplicant that's > not aware of multi-BSSID should be able to pick one of the non- > transmitting BSSes and connect to it. > > But here? I don't understand how that'd be possible. > Will add nl80211 feature flags for MBSSID and EMA. > Also, are the interface limits (# of AP interfaces) even sufficient, or > should there be different limits for non-transmitting? I could imagine > that it'd be easier to have more interfaces if they're > non-transmitting, > since then you don't have to deal with more beacons but only more MAC > addresses. > This implementation allows a single MBSSID-set, so only one transmitting interface per wiphy. Even if non-transmitting don't have beacons associated, drivers will have limit depending on contexts allocated for other interface characteristics. Hence these limits are accepted using 'max_num_vaps' and 'max_profile_periodicity'. > So from that POV this seems rather lacking the necessary bits to be > able > to confidently use it from userspace? > > johannes Next version will have feature flags as well as max VAPs and profile periodicity exposed to application.