Linux wireless drivers development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Vladimir Kondratiev <qca_vkondrat@qca.qualcomm.com>
Cc: Jouni Malinen <jouni@qca.qualcomm.com>,
	"Peer, Ilan" <ilan.peer@intel.com>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Rodriguez, Luis" <rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.com>,
	"John W . Linville" <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] cfg80211: P2P find phase offload
Date: Wed, 05 Jun 2013 09:53:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1370418780.8920.19.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2109265.XIVW7kjjZK@lx-vladimir>

On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 10:10 +0300, Vladimir Kondratiev wrote:

> Then, I think it would be appropriate to say following in the comment for
> start_p2p_find (no code changes, it is only expectations for the friver behavior):
> 

> While performing P2P discovery, driver should report all received
> probe-request and probe-response frames via cfg80211_rx_mgmt,
> accordingly to the rx mgmt filter, as set by mgmt_frame_register().

Well, realistically there will be a frame registration for probe
requests, so stating that is kinda pointless, but OK.

> When reporting probes, driver/firmware may do its best to filter out
> probes that would not be replied with probe-resp accordingly to the
> P2P rules for active device configuration.

This I think should be more specific. "[W]ould not be replied" is
clearly one step, but in an environment where you actually want to
offload the P2P probe responses that is pretty much useless. I'd rather
say something like:

---
When probe response offload it supported, the device should not report
probe requests to the host that it already responded to. It must report
(and therefore not respond to) probe requests that indicate the sending
device is in active PBC mode (specifically, <...add more details...>).
It may also drop invalid or malformed probe requests or ones that would
not be replied to for other reasons.
---

I think this would be a reasonable tradeoff. It means that if a probe
request is actually reported, wpa_supplicant must reply to it, and we
don't have to get into the business of having to decide whether or not
it needs to respond.

Alternatively, we could specify that the device _must_ respond if
offload is supported, and then report it.

However, we need to clearly specify this so that we don't get two
responses, one from the device and one from wpa_s. If there's no way to
specify this, we need to introduce a "reply already sent" flag into the
frame reporting.

johannes


  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-05  7:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-04  6:44 [PATCH v8] P2P find phase offload Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-04  6:44 ` [PATCH v8] cfg80211: " Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-04 10:07   ` Peer, Ilan
2013-06-04 11:24     ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-04 12:07       ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-04 14:03         ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-04 14:29           ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-04 14:35             ` Malinen, Jouni
2013-06-04 16:47               ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-04 18:30                 ` Jouni Malinen
2013-06-05  7:10                   ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-05  7:53                     ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2013-06-05 13:30                       ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-11 12:12                         ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-05  7:46               ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-05  8:10                 ` Arend van Spriel
2013-06-05  8:18                   ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-05  8:38                     ` Arend van Spriel
2013-06-05 16:26                       ` Vladimir Kondratiev
2013-06-05  8:12                 ` Jouni Malinen
2013-06-04 12:10       ` Peer, Ilan
2013-06-04 10:43   ` Johannes Berg
2013-06-04  6:51 ` [PATCH v8] " Johannes Berg

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=1370418780.8920.19.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net \
    --to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
    --cc=ilan.peer@intel.com \
    --cc=jouni@qca.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=qca_vkondrat@qca.qualcomm.com \
    --cc=rodrigue@qca.qualcomm.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