From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sipsolutions.net (s3.sipsolutions.net [168.119.38.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABF5D158203 for ; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 09:01:31 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726563693; cv=none; b=aq+A+lCbK9y8o2Q1jaAScw4BGaOnggb0oxsUi9yc/AS1VoUrnB+gSILiIp54KqxdGH9OuetBmvV2FA/q5Mr9Pvlw0ac0b3z5//pZVjD28C+9sNublH9rpktffsPgPsZEohMggj+N67xsOO0SM4j7rahZsoM+VH+qK7Jdm2zUBdo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726563693; c=relaxed/simple; bh=31CGZpw0k5Vj53jEtmeLDjIVZ+sK7rWkwz6DAgOwXT8=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=oZAFQsnA5BTM4GEumZcRrH4Yu8+I88ndNvvhmz61o+ABNLEj+YT+Hi3bGc792UtOJLmKhoMGm5WAgjuNFeqdpErwxNDAVWFBauHbvQa5H6v9cFldfOEX3Ln9AeoKAU7/Oa2Jyg/KUeAnABmPY1rjgZLAlQzrEFk/mCtyK+m8p+I= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b=DYd5TVZj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=168.119.38.16 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sipsolutions.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sipsolutions.net header.i=@sipsolutions.net header.b="DYd5TVZj" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sipsolutions.net; s=mail; h=MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:References:In-Reply-To:Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender: Reply-To:Cc:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=31CGZpw0k5Vj53jEtmeLDjIVZ+sK7rWkwz6DAgOwXT8=; t=1726563691; x=1727773291; b=DYd5TVZj6t0Xr/X6Etd0gV/L3eMALmQfUj8gai6NNjWH8Au H4YEZRo8jgvEHLk1ZTDX+jlKnfZCfulAV2+UeuhaPfAg459Srn+CvIS1iQ2FHmlpl4kgIS0HzoYnV v1JfKCzX8woFdrb+hR9wEipQ3cUB356Hrh6pkT7OUWJ1HE6cUpHK4g6GPMH9agf2/LJ6mmN9jt2IP ljPKVPtQBGhlknjjMTlDgtt+RHXxqQG9fk5Ya6QWPp4yIRbjFlKw2y9cZdzZib3+2Up1K3bPeGG2B 6z4WVhp5oCMrl+WzVuNu5V0WhvClloUFnIfan/kOiNLM6jPGx8LDWhAO8pjLzYZw==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1sqU5Q-0000000E6NF-3L5V; Tue, 17 Sep 2024 11:01:29 +0200 Message-ID: <29b0fe777228cedfa219fc8268b6a7fc8c04164f.camel@sipsolutions.net> Subject: Re: [RFC 5/6] wifi: mac80211: support per-radio filter flags From: Johannes Berg To: Felix Fietkau , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2024 11:01:27 +0200 In-Reply-To: <4193632b-7eca-4dcb-b40a-982b3bf7705d@nbd.name> References: <7a871d4d2ce7adafb14cf971c1fdeb9cd01a4169.1722885720.git-series.nbd@nbd.name> <163ebbf7c79d6aece2744be84d88264555f352e9.camel@sipsolutions.net> <4193632b-7eca-4dcb-b40a-982b3bf7705d@nbd.name> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.52.4 (3.52.4-1.fc40) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-malware-bazaar: not-scanned On Fri, 2024-08-23 at 18:26 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > On 23.08.24 12:20, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Mon, 2024-08-05 at 21:23 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > > > This allows drivers to improve filtering of unwanted packets when usi= ng > > > different combinations of filter/monitor settings on radios. > > >=20 > >=20 > > Here, it would seem to make more sense to simply give the necessary per= - > > interface information to the driver? Drivers likely have more > > restrictions and will need less complex data structures (or just > > iteration) to figure out what's eventually needed for each hw etc. > >=20 > > Some drivers might anyway even have different filters per interface, > > even if they're operating on the same channel. >=20 > I can do that as well. However, I do think it makes sense to have=20 > per-radio tracking in mac80211 as well, because I'm pretty sure that not= =20 > just mt76, but ath12k would also be able to make use of this. But if you have per-link, deriving per-radio is effectively trivial, so I don't see why we should do the extra work to track it? johannes