From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ot1-f47.google.com (mail-ot1-f47.google.com [209.85.210.47]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4391DDF4E for ; Wed, 8 Nov 2023 15:07:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="GzdAV17V" Received: by mail-ot1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 46e09a7af769-6ce2b6b3cb6so4405883a34.3 for ; Wed, 08 Nov 2023 07:07:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1699456047; x=1700060847; darn=lists.linux.dev; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wqfLHo1JvXxVOZwI33GMqX4/sE4nwVjr0JJOMv+QPVk=; b=GzdAV17Ve8SZkRiRbalsXS1VJLmg1wH4TGJqKTfmta0CYzoKpXvm9+DfH1aflPWmaQ 7Sv5ecJIgw2oFNEt4cleHg7eGQEcD3zmQHWJ3d4Zkcf5kIwkSsMSlqqbY1nLBsoEga6Y SXMfx5S/AZ1h1O0f+pcRaSCJ6jtI/m8JKMJhLTylr88Zd1HGTmignbdGD7WOrwoUyVOU ESvw+FHmip7AlSKt8NE1nA6Er8m0SWEyROFCWQfJrSUQjU8OO51wr/rSKAEbPUfvXTlp luPI/vKdh0wj8jKqAbEcFO4E9wCWNaBJCfVfeO+fn9eRXxKLEHw8zGM+oI5hPVPstNlj whqg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1699456047; x=1700060847; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wqfLHo1JvXxVOZwI33GMqX4/sE4nwVjr0JJOMv+QPVk=; b=lzSnUdLp64OLtkwvjjDc+JABJjkqViDMcHbvMlC+i8JHuZr6Aor6DyTmRh5bCAt57g IR7SFcgqs87ofde1SJiNiorVL/5/fXkFX3ppTTe/UWh3DJv7ybS6CTsw/0wzzBiG0N5e bqLxt+FPThMPIIPtHCxkYzUCarVF0n7E8FHGBuPalkUjHIigOC65FIXdtQ3ztKIg1RIC mKJOY6D7E8xdQJwF/XMsl7EpoQRjqS2/BCikpFn02zlXB+JV51+EMpxKKwNfpS0oy7HS bPOaNJjbO6+bssKIHQM6hvvvINFnMGbB0llJKY19bMYkouK0Aw6U82RoAFOStCz6Lq/B qZlA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxd/OXWx/j+9efvRWFewX02XT+xaSQf7mHgv7OJZ9nDotvWWJ7N l6JRiLJSdN+Evs9F7gemn8g= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEUAffvgiY3VFozcaJou2fxqg2fnwnK4rSGi65SsP56nAlP56L+4TlGJ7447eWai/M+JpxHZQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:3a11:b0:6d3:14dc:823e with SMTP id di17-20020a0568303a1100b006d314dc823emr2334268otb.11.1699456047119; Wed, 08 Nov 2023 07:07:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from [172.16.49.130] (cpe-70-114-247-242.austin.res.rr.com. [70.114.247.242]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id eu14-20020a0568303d0e00b006ce2f4861c5sm1907323otb.62.2023.11.08.07.07.26 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 08 Nov 2023 07:07:26 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6e709910-ad9a-4681-83bd-759a4e26e53b@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 09:07:25 -0600 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: iwd@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] dpp: initial version of PKEX enrollee support Content-Language: en-US To: James Prestwood , iwd@lists.linux.dev References: <20231107170629.1831655-1-prestwoj@gmail.com> <20231107170629.1831655-3-prestwoj@gmail.com> From: Denis Kenzior In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Hi James, >> Since you're sharing the DPP state machine object between the two interfaces, >> it seems like starting PKEX on the SharedCode interface side-effects the state >> of the regular DeviceProvisioning interface?  I hope that's not intended? > > Your right, it does. Once PKEX finishes it starts DPP on the DeviceProvisioning > interface. This was intended, but if we want to keep the two isolated I'll have > to change gears and think about how we can do it. Ugh :) This is something no-one but the person who wrote the code would expect to happen. The interfaces should be kept separate. Internal implementation wise, I think you probably can get away with a shared dpp state machine object, but you do have to track which 'interface' the state machine is actually bound to at the time. > > May have to create a dpp_sm for each DBus interface not per-wdev/netdev, and > find some way of communicating which interface the property changed calls > correspond to. > Well, there's always dpp_find or dpp_pkex_find. > Apart from the string/cast comments the rest seem to revolve around the shared > state between PKEX/DPP. If separating them is the way we want to go I can do that. > I didn't look super closely at the spec details, but what I saw seemed reasonable. Regards, -Denis