Linux wireless drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Luciano Coelho <coelho@ti.com>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: linville@tuxdriver.com, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nl80211/cfg80211: add ssid filtering for sched_scan
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 10:49:22 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1314776962.2296.540.camel@cumari> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1314776396.4161.19.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>

On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 09:39 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: 
> On Wed, 2011-08-31 at 10:30 +0300, Luciano Coelho wrote:
> 
> > > Ok. I think the BSSID blacklist would just be a separate attribute, I
> > > see no reason to have a nesting for that.
> > 
> > Actually, we could make the filter and blacklisting very generic.  We
> > can use the same attributes for both.  The only difference would be that
> > the former would include anything that matches and the latter would
> > exclude anything that matches.
> 
> Hm, true, but does it really make sense to blacklist SSIDs when we have
> a whitelist for them? Or would you want to whitelist a wildcard and then
> blacklist a specific one?

Whitelisting and blacklisting the same SSID would be one of the
"illegal" cases that we may want to reject with -EINVAL.

But my idea was that you could do this:

MATCH={SSID=foo} and
NOT_MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05}

or

MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
NOT_MATCH={SSID=foo}

or, making more sense:

MATCH={BSSID=00:01:02:03:04:05} and
NOT_MATCH={MIN_RSSI=-70}

My point is that many of these combinations might not make sense, but
generalizing the API allows for cases that *do* make sense but we have
not thought of yet.


> > I also prefer using match/not_match (couldn't find a better antonym),
> > because "filter" is ambiguous (let-through or leave-out?).
> 
> agree.

We could also use a single list like this:

FILTER={1={MATCH=true, SSID=foo}, 2={MATCH=false, BSSID=...}

But then we're becoming a bit too "netfiltery". :P What do you think?

-- 
Cheers,
Luca.


  reply	other threads:[~2011-08-31  7:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-08-30 12:39 [PATCH] nl80211/cfg80211: add ssid filtering for sched_scan Luciano Coelho
2011-08-30 14:16 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-30 15:27   ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-30 16:09     ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31  6:09       ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31  6:20         ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31  7:30           ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31  7:39             ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31  7:49               ` Luciano Coelho [this message]
2011-08-31  7:53                 ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31  7:54                   ` Johannes Berg
2011-08-31  8:03                     ` Luciano Coelho
2011-08-31  8:08                   ` Luciano Coelho

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1314776962.2296.540.camel@cumari \
    --to=coelho@ti.com \
    --cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox