On 2/24/23 06:59, Johannes Berg wrote:
From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
Warn only once since the ratelimit parameters are still
allowing too many messages to happen. This will no longer
tell you all the different processes, but still gives a
heads-up of sorts.
Also modify the message to note that wext stops working
for future Wi-Fi 7 hardware, this is already implemented
in commit 4ca69027691a ("wifi: wireless: deny wireless
extensions on MLO-capable devices") and is maybe of more
relevance to users than the fact that we'd like to have
wireless extensions deprecated.
The issue with Wi-Fi 7 is that you can now have multiple
connections to the same AP, so a whole bunch of things
now become per link rather than per netdev, which can't
really be handled in wireless extensions.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>
---
Not really sure I see a better solution ...
- tracking it per task would be nice in a way I guess,
but is also awful;
- adjusting the rate limit will lead us into an endless
bikeshedding discussion about the parameters;
- removing the warning will leave us with no indiciation
of what happens with Wi-Fi 7 hardware, although most of
the processes using them now (like Chrome browser??)
probably ignore failures from it
- trying to support a 30+ year old technology on modern
Wi-Fi 7 hardware will be "interesting" and lead to all
kinds of hacks there
---
net/wireless/wext-core.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/wireless/wext-core.c b/net/wireless/wext-core.c
index 13a72b17248e..a125fd1fa134 100644
--- a/net/wireless/wext-core.c
+++ b/net/wireless/wext-core.c
@@ -641,8 +641,8 @@ static void wireless_warn_cfg80211_wext(void)
{
char name[sizeof(current->comm)];
- pr_warn_ratelimited("warning: `%s' uses wireless extensions that are deprecated for modern drivers; use nl80211\n",
- get_task_comm(name, current));
+ pr_warn_once("warning: `%s' uses wireless extensions which will stop working for Wi-Fi 7 hardware; use nl80211\n",
+ get_task_comm(name, current));
}
#endif
Johannes,
Although this patch will stop the log spamming that I see, it will not provide
much information upstream for fixing the problems.
Even if this patch is applied to the kernel, I plan to keep my local, once per
task, patch so that I can keep upstream informed, and perhaps get fixes applied
there.
Larry
