On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 07:15:45PM +0530, Veerendranath Jakkam wrote:
> Add support fetch and indicate per-link MLO signal poll information
> via control interface.
> diff --git a/src/drivers/driver_nl80211.c b/src/drivers/driver_nl80211.c
> +static int nl80211_get_links_channel_width(struct wpa_driver_nl80211_data *drv,
> + struct wpa_mlo_signal_info *mlo_sig)
> +{
> + //TODO: Kernel yet to support fetching link channel width information.
> + return 0;
> +}
This does not seem to do anything, so I'd leave this function out for
now and add it in a separate patch if and when such information becomes
available. I don't see much point for a hostap.git TODO item for
something that sounds like a kernel TODO item..
> + if (mlo_si.links[i].chanwidth != CHAN_WIDTH_UNKNOWN) {
..
> + if (mlo_si.links[i].center_frq1 > 0) {
..
> + if (mlo_si.links[i].center_frq2 > 0) {
..
These all look unreachable since those values are hardcoded in
driver_nl80211.c. I'd leave this out for now to avoid confusion and add
them once the information becomes available.
> @@ -11576,6 +11656,7 @@ static int wpa_supplicant_ctrl_iface_mlo_status(struct wpa_supplicant *wpa_s,
> char * wpa_supplicant_ctrl_iface_process(struct wpa_supplicant *wpa_s,
> char *buf, size_t *resp_len)
> {
> +
> char *reply;
Why?
> @@ -12587,6 +12668,9 @@ char * wpa_supplicant_ctrl_iface_process(struct wpa_supplicant *wpa_s,
> + } else if (os_strncmp(buf, "MLO_SIGNAL_POLL", 11) == 0) {
> + reply_len = wpa_supplicant_mlo_signal_poll(wpa_s, reply,
> + reply_size);
Why would this allow any postfix on that command string instead of using
exact matching with os_strcmp()?
> } else if (os_strncmp(buf, "MLO_STATUS", 10) == 0) {
And same would actually apply for this from an earlier patch for that
matter.
--
Jouni Malinen PGP id EFC895FA
_______________________________________________
Hostap mailing list
Hostap@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/hostap
