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 E2FA538DC0 for ; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 16:00:33 +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=1726070435; cv=none; b=Vy0xWrgv3m0rArcXFsJ1a6zaR8RH3AoTEnNjbTfwzU1F7ZYZcNQQLHgy4OF368l44MC3Tkmt7MZvyjf9TKMyJRz1ds8hHVE6Isd7Zhdcw+d2XKVbCLiGyFlxGvvcDlOQUhv8Il9jxSfi0ldJUKy2ptm6zfeJ2+MtjJtafnxKVCs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1726070435; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0iBJlVkdJTVNH/dTaH2AMDRd1BkRaHhXHrReBrPuvBo=; h=Message-ID:Subject:From:To:Cc:Date:In-Reply-To:References: Content-Type:MIME-Version; b=QIbFai0Mbplm3kkhyls8bd+Evg6UcXz9q+5cNYkmwMcxKyJizHa5SvvSK9h7aagz+NGS+gtEA/L3oCfk6biGjxWbpXUeY60R7yjgYnuZN0/kckf95HhL52vgN8tejIUI6T2cjP3G+MUl3zdVqpnPLFLVNvAxI35Is5OjffWAsf4= 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=UAbnea+E; 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="UAbnea+E" 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:Cc:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-To: Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID; bh=0iBJlVkdJTVNH/dTaH2AMDRd1BkRaHhXHrReBrPuvBo=; t=1726070434; x=1727280034; b=UAbnea+Ed5e409lnWuFVDvDIy2hjO7/Y0IQyZWBWJ2PUByT pLlIMfNl0YXXw8c6ATJJGZQtmRvp7ccFhtkcFSyrvr1PWKBT4N4rjBaXD7NaOde3XBhKWI/JibaUA PgyPiMNG1UxD/NISdT3D6IgO0KGpaed0CciKx+YyBeSAZn3Lbob/ihFM9FyUfAO9A8TWRMnscx0K4 6PQfJz3WvfQcCMwz/R6d+1TOoLETyoSep6H3AQtNHyt/P5JsuD9hiO4w9JMLLYHm3f6XhnK02lyA6 GrPt9qOwbLau4M2akpS+MB2fS+EJQpQhOIexqKU1kg/NAmJYsEFyS5cySDjYz64g==; Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_X25519__RSA_PSS_RSAE_SHA256__AES_256_GCM:256) (Exim 4.97) (envelope-from ) id 1soPld-000000097PK-2pYB; Wed, 11 Sep 2024 18:00:29 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] wifi: cfg80211: check radio iface combination for multi radio per wiphy From: Johannes Berg To: Felix Fietkau , Karthikeyan Periyasamy Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2024 18:00:28 +0200 In-Reply-To: <3d2d9a9e-43ee-46f5-bf66-6227ce6bdfd7@nbd.name> References: <20240904112928.2924508-1-quic_periyasa@quicinc.com> <0d800949-d43a-2172-6aa7-5d0069d3b88a@quicinc.com> <36d111a1118349a86946bfdbc55e8fcbf3720fbc.camel@sipsolutions.net> <7ddb082fc1a1886f343e4c0233a24221932edb64.camel@sipsolutions.net> <3d2d9a9e-43ee-46f5-bf66-6227ce6bdfd7@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 Wed, 2024-09-11 at 17:58 +0200, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >=20 > > We still need the part of the patch that calls the validation on each > > radio, but it shouldn't be different from the global one. If you could > > make that patch I'd appreciate it. >=20 > It's implemented the way we discussed it back when this topic came up.= =20 > Legacy user space gets the ifcomb data from the first radio for=20 > compatibility. The actual global ifcomb data is reported in a new attribu= te. >=20 Hah, I forgot about that. Then that means we _do_ need to relax the validation in this case, but I guess needs to come with a big comment saying how the driver-global !=3D nl80211 global ... Sorry! johannes