From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com [205.220.168.131]) (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 C172035A381 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 06:51:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.168.131 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777445471; cv=none; b=rsZWP6ziAOkNLF47bMJbYm4l4T4rddgGi1ScKlniY16cSYk5THRqWWhP0HdHYE7Q51dXg9HJsaqajEWzIZN3kHd1R7UZfg6ia5YiBmbv7F+iuncqY97x6Pf69bPxW8yN8x6ySLokjTbdpjGHnMYzLL/rCaDTMRrZ4SXp4nFBipo= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1777445471; c=relaxed/simple; bh=mmP7QiW4d1bssgkwur3RJ8wod5EVKfMTJtnt/jWz9/o=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=kJKawIn9DJNNW73hXhlXH5sanzLdl4dIjhtKEFys1L9W2c2UYvjwGYkRO8M91bOVis9mJvRkUBIVSE9m4cSOkdkXsLpwSJTNMWipmidDrrXNuqhpqjvRgL39R6ejHtrIfdBddLa5LO4DoxvisV9aOO1YbuTJ/tPTd4uU2n6as4Y= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=oss.qualcomm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oss.qualcomm.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=qualcomm.com header.i=@qualcomm.com header.b=RI2QVmwp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oss.qualcomm.com header.i=@oss.qualcomm.com header.b=cMwQfn8n; arc=none smtp.client-ip=205.220.168.131 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=oss.qualcomm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oss.qualcomm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=qualcomm.com header.i=@qualcomm.com header.b="RI2QVmwp"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=oss.qualcomm.com header.i=@oss.qualcomm.com header.b="cMwQfn8n" Received: from pps.filterd (m0279867.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (8.18.1.11/8.18.1.11) with ESMTP id 63T390Tl2984311 for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 06:51:10 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qualcomm.com; h= cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s=qcppdkim1; bh= H0sJQxmiELhuOgvoZF2ADMqtFQSUXgp1xtx/C9muUvI=; b=RI2QVmwpG5pUbcOD cV35R9GH0hiLvqCuB56EAlUW0tZ8QVmEZ1fA/zg+iIMz7lXWhoWwb+Dr16/FP32S BRlBG8garMniWwIcR02qn0B+BlhAzdkWhJzLin/EI0Sg7dYc2VWzn/g2JwqoIGrQ YSJh2IVWNb7OadMipM+e2by+jGb7J1yvmNJ4LNHKPPTG/R/d1KaOMH0TffxRDMsl kbbJAG0osOGbtCoExQBgHcBUS9psJWEokNwjQk0oGukOm2P4bZ4vUZMMLw5F/4XQ MHtGCaBl53byzdx5MYoSQtthmEVUckBtbn7ZJGNglaZK+89Hd6beICJYDuF9rJ8U 3hIOqw== Received: from mail-pf1-f198.google.com (mail-pf1-f198.google.com [209.85.210.198]) by mx0a-0031df01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 4du0u1tghw-1 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128 verify=NOT) for ; Wed, 29 Apr 2026 06:51:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: by mail-pf1-f198.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-82fa5ecd760so6294080b3a.0 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 23:51:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oss.qualcomm.com; s=google; t=1777445468; x=1778050268; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=H0sJQxmiELhuOgvoZF2ADMqtFQSUXgp1xtx/C9muUvI=; b=cMwQfn8nEhC8X/mwYtIG5Cj2wbYCH6hzGFxFA5B8ZdQEvLZTXe5CdnnjYIPQ9s0HX9 EkLy/IUMnVGA7503Co++xRAa/pCMI+0+Dlyy7ibRQcSvhyr9L65hByfyrsRraHRoYs9M s2R3KpyYHi1Ru4D+/YdzV2DLDXqfwKk/cOkY4r6QILLEjvr65kzYWb71nn9JGS+Wu7GF 3aPByOwxyQaN36ewN9HEU6uM+/S0mgC5gjDgOf0UCWAGS1ALqA6DqJp4t17oV93vq6HE HfLaMPiS02TnJP0utFCY/kcAebTf1mlLQ6Y6Hk/Et0KomxWTr3jca+j1RunQRcbd82ME sdfQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1777445468; x=1778050268; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=H0sJQxmiELhuOgvoZF2ADMqtFQSUXgp1xtx/C9muUvI=; b=hYfct2phGMXvlWIt2ABzoUHVGdV8A7++dcgiG+yoNu+jDAdTPRYyuj3ZgLZMZ9ny7F D1MBcdGljhJMaV26rIAlB5yvTamvLjg4ESTOdYmm16P8g9UmLJmSDcQ+O5ZJtmKBFq2b EkYh+6JyU+mHZYTpjflieL9qfrpoxCq0maXm3HfsimArXxn/EY37SGd7xUIp7yNZBJXG A8PnvdD0XGApevz+Lj79xfHHv7twePvRHIjaGgPjFR1Tm4DKja2SobFT3JJBEozHVJru KoiC/Ga7wb62mRvmmKkHra9QqrFm0aKOc3XYMVKM6PcywOlMrPbax8ThGir9KcMAmMRm eO/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxv8wVE+yBrz7kigno/JrIDlQzurFQu/kw7pANeI4kzmR6ArnGI Jvnd1qaxOcvodlQbP7NtO5jwo9+kuSde9nuYUiiqFFp67q+PYx27sJq1b8YWXzTD9HEd/WN17Xp FMg7lLHbYuNoeoS1NcrLzU2jTxFpf5eVnh3ol+9POQryl2VjbE0YxAK8BNzbEGug1CqeZNfEwVW Ri8g== X-Gm-Gg: AeBDietQoKAgb9BzxnbGbrtHYuDZwhHTcEhcy1ppSG1PfdOb0IkzxPBdheZ0NAQcFeT qLG0EKAZpBgpo7T32m/oZjsBOWBnZjaIglL1P1ZM2fTak4t/9PUScRFI3o/zOY/P/615UEVc6U/ Dasz7nbU/GMVnFHHjQ919L66lXdJ9jVzx/BLLnYXOvCwwkXzzUIDz02WKSr2d37J9CLJeTLZChZ KyJEiycSkAcWCQVhT15ttoeKPoac13IMQh/eH+RCKrtD4Fo7MYFQflyg48kDcSRhT1DN+HjuaNA XZT5uqIXY8zdNKTP7BvcpvsJvCNoqJjZkTV+LzWsR4gDprhuCdsNV9Ud1gF78riujkfWb3UYL6y BEZX0VyHkjSMhBXd4h3ahQAm8CEh6t7I1AKB1YckOvnYt+Yjl2XS/sPy3ywadN0Ql X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1252:b0:82a:5e9a:922e with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-834ddc5aea6mr6341060b3a.42.1777445468472; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 23:51:08 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1252:b0:82a:5e9a:922e with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-834ddc5aea6mr6341032b3a.42.1777445467974; Tue, 28 Apr 2026 23:51:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.206.105.147] ([202.46.23.25]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-834ed5cd3aasm1059829b3a.18.2026.04.28.23.51.06 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Apr 2026 23:51:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <77a8e304-e173-4387-8f8d-77bb6f3140d3@oss.qualcomm.com> Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 12:21:04 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH wireless-next 2/2] wifi: cfg80211/mac80211: extend cfg80211_rx_assoc_resp_data() for assoc encryption To: Johannes Berg Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <20260427150735.2391680-1-kavita.kavita@oss.qualcomm.com> <20260427150735.2391680-3-kavita.kavita@oss.qualcomm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Kavita Kavita In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Proofpoint-GUID: oQARSVx9KJc-nA0eU8hVu7dI36rhAtTr X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: oQARSVx9KJc-nA0eU8hVu7dI36rhAtTr X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.4 cv=aPPAb79m c=1 sm=1 tr=0 ts=69f1aa5d cx=c_pps a=m5Vt/hrsBiPMCU0y4gIsQw==:117 a=ZePRamnt/+rB5gQjfz0u9A==:17 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=A5OVakUREuEA:10 a=s4-Qcg_JpJYA:10 a=VkNPw1HP01LnGYTKEx00:22 a=u7WPNUs3qKkmUXheDGA7:22 a=eoimf2acIAo5FJnRuUoq:22 a=fpCgLw27Jt1RAFyqosAA:9 a=3ZKOabzyN94A:10 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 a=IoOABgeZipijB_acs4fv:22 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details-Enc: AW1haW4tMjYwNDI5MDA2NSBTYWx0ZWRfX99Rgbdj2u7Y9 WcycIZ0WP9BJyY2gpOyUJU9BvX0EP69w/Cxe2vS1oAmSnqRnN20xTyWR96RAH4UbR2S7DUMxNQW JlmfRMBBuaRFEQPByD2DbG/UUcF2cvZlecaztuzs95tt/+2GOwT5zQnHdyVNhGT+RS1odc1Ae5P 0dZ3oqLnGF2qzf2OKjfhCNPlTLHKvtXt/HvnGLmT1pWkPA3Nld5ybVLmvhLjqCsOWFGj8pGITSP ZlcphZXadgFZepikM4BopCmyvbgD7xmBavn40Pw22geDr+iuhFbbIjeHAIGVzHBLxtmvNVn+Pxu UN/e9+/Qxmv1BCJnVJ9L9hwaXI6FwAx51gUQLXeLCgeUii/uBsB0FQm8yvWTXtRDaXmn+L9Mn6Z QYN5GJTZYdPcKUKh168pwq7ow2Dj/i/gDjHZp32DVayuF/mSSetEnWhXVbJoBj3uf8ryvjKUD5+ 5aZB9BFMmwmlD1HO2CA== X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1143,Hydra:6.1.51,FMLib:17.12.100.49 definitions=2026-04-28_05,2026-04-28_01,2025-10-01_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 adultscore=0 impostorscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=typeunknown authscore=0 authtc= authcc= route=outbound adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.22.0-2604200000 definitions=main-2604290065 On 4/29/2026 11:59 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry I didn't get back to this yesterday. I see you now just sent > another patch. It's fine. Thank you for the review. > >> The attribute is intended to indicate that the entire exchange was encrypted, >> not just the Response. For the Response frame, checking ieee80211_has_protected() >> is possible since the full frame is available in data->buf, but for the Request >> frame only IEs are stored in ifmgd->assoc_req_ies, the MAC header is not preserved, >> so I cannot check the Protected bit for the Request. > > I guess that makes sense, fair enough. > >> While an unencrypted Request paired with an encrypted Response is unlikely in practice, >> we did not want to leave that gap, so I used the epp_peer flag. That said, if you think >> checking the Protected bit on the Response frame alone is sufficient, we are fine with >> that approach too. > > It's actually also something wpa_s could check, but I suppose it's > plausible that non-wpa_s observers of these events might be interested. > >> In the wireless-next tip, there are already commits that combine both cfg80211 >> and mac80211 changes together,  > > True, but that's usually if the whole thing is small enough I guess? Yes, it's usually for small changes. This patch is also small. > >> so since the assoc_encrypted field addition in >> cfg80211 and the mac80211 epp_peer lookup that sets it are tightly dependent on >> each other, I kept them in the same commit. If you prefer them split into two >> separate commits, I can do that. Will update the commit as well. > > I think in this case I might have just preferred to have the first > commit add *all* the infrastructure, and indicate that it's done for > assoc for the reasons above, and then have the second just be mac80211 > to fill it? Well, I have already dropped this patch. I was thinking from a wpa_supplicant perspective, where NL80211_CMD_ASSOCIATE will be preferred over NL80211_CMD_CONNECT when both are available, so the assoc_encrypted field in the mac80211 case seemed redundant. However, if there are use cases with non-wpa_supplicant applications that might prefer NL80211_CMD_CONNECT even when both events are sent, then there might be value in keeping this patch. I am not entirely sure about such use cases. Do you think this patch really matters? If yes, I can bring it back. I think we can keep it as a single patch. Thank you. > > Not super important though I guess. > > johannes