Re: [PATCH 3/3] netdev: hack back in disconnect event

[James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com>]

Hi Denis,

On 12/5/23 13:37, Denis Kenzior wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> On 12/5/23 11:52, James Prestwood wrote:
>> Not sure how we want to address this, but FT is special in that it
>> has no connect_cb but can still trigger an associate timeout.
>> Currently if FT times out associating IWD will hang indefinitely.
>
> Do our auto tests cover this case?  I wonder why they didn't flag this 
> earlier?
They don't (only auth timeouts), but patches 1/2 add an associate 
timeout test.
>
>>
>> This behavior can be tested with the prior autotest patches (without
>> this patch applied).
>>
>> Fixes: 30c6a10f28 ("netdev: Separate connect_failed and disconnected 
>> paths")
>> ---
>>   src/netdev.c | 8 +++++++-
>>   1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/src/netdev.c b/src/netdev.c
>> index f2e887b4..2d1120c4 100644
>> --- a/src/netdev.c
>> +++ b/src/netdev.c
>> @@ -3045,7 +3045,13 @@ static void netdev_associate_event(struct 
>> l_genl_msg *msg,
>>                * out. The failed connection must be explicitly
>>                * initiated here.
>>                */
>> -            netdev_connect_failed(netdev,
>> +            if (!netdev->ap) {
>
> if (netdev->in_ft) ?
>
>> +                if (netdev->event_filter)
>> +                    netdev->event_filter(netdev,
>> +                        NETDEV_EVENT_DISCONNECT_BY_SME,
>> +                        NULL, netdev->user_data);
>> +            } else
>> +                netdev_connect_failed(netdev,
>>                       NETDEV_RESULT_ASSOCIATION_FAILED,
>>                       status_code);
>>               return;
>
> I wonder if we should make ft_associate use netdev_reassociate?

So pass station_connect_cb into ft_associate, then to netdev? That seems 
reasonable.

> Regards,
> -Denis