On Thu, 2018-03-22 at 11:51 +0530, mpubbise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>
> > So IMHO - just get rid of the bitmap and hard-code AP_VLAN.
> >
>
> I agree with you only partially.
>
> Today, I do not see any driver advertising SW_CRYPTO_CONTROL other than
> ath10k. There could be some driver which would want to advertise
> SW_CRYPTO_CONTROL and do not support the software encryption for VLAN
> devices. In that case, hard-coding doesn't seem to solve the problem
> completely right? No?
Well, my point is that such a hypothetical driver is completely
irrelevant because it doesn't make any sense to have this behaviour -
it would mean it cannot support AP_VLAN with encryption, so it might as
well not support AP_VLAN at all.
> Or you meant to say that driver should advertise the support for
> AP_VLANs only if it can support encryption on AP_VLAN devices?
Right.
> If this
> the case, then I could see some code in ieee80211_register_hw which says
> this,
>
> /* if low-level driver supports AP, we also support VLAN */
> if (local->hw.wiphy->interface_modes & BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP)) {
> hw->wiphy->interface_modes |=
> BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP_VLAN);
> hw->wiphy->software_iftypes |=
> BIT(NL80211_IFTYPE_AP_VLAN);
> }
Yes, but if such a driver comes along we can change this.
johannes
