From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.63]:8615 "EHLO mail-gw2-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751422AbaKKKoq (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2014 05:44:46 -0500 Message-ID: <5461E89A.1060908@broadcom.com> (sfid-20141111_114508_641307_D99A3E56) Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:44:42 +0100 From: Arend van Spriel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Johannes Berg CC: "Gautam (Gautam Kumar) Shukla" , "linville@tuxdriver.com" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "linux-api@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Jithu Jance , Sreenath S , Vladimir Kondratiev Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] linux-wireless: Added psk in struct cfg80211_connect_params needed for offloading 4way handshake to driver References: <1415698161.2163.0.camel@sipsolutions.net> <5461DCC9.5050702@broadcom.com> <1415700220.2163.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> <5461E67E.7010408@broadcom.com> <1415702338.2163.5.camel@sipsolutions.net> In-Reply-To: <1415702338.2163.5.camel@sipsolutions.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11-11-14 11:38, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Tue, 2014-11-11 at 11:35 +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: > >> What did pop up is the wiphy flags vs. nl80211 feature flags. When that >> comes up it looks like 'potAtoes, potaetoes' to me. >> >> So is there are clear design rule for when to use which flag. For me the >> wiphy object represents the device/firmware and 4-way handshake offload >> support is determined by what the device/firmware supports. > > There are three types of flags: > > * wiphy flag attributes - deprecated as far as I'm concerned Ok. deprecated is clear enough ;-) > * wiphy nl80211 feature flags - much easier to use in kernel (and > userspace) > * nl80211 protocol flags - only one exists > (NL80211_PROTOCOL_FEATURE_SPLIT_WIPHY_DUMP) Thanks, Arend