HI, > -----Original Message----- > From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Monday, 24 June 2024 15:50 > To: Peer, Ilan <ilan.peer@xxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Korenblit, Miriam Rachel <miriam.rachel.korenblit@xxxxxxxxx>; > johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-wireless@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Berg, Johannes > <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] wifi: cfg80211: Add support for interface usage > notification > > "Peer, Ilan" <ilan.peer@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hi, > > > >> > > >> > As depicted above, the need to inform the driver about the intended > >> > usage of the interface is real. > >> > >> Sure, I can understand the need is real. This just feels like an ugly > >> workaround, not a proper solution. > >> > > > > If you have a different solution in mind, please share. > > Yeah, fix the root cause :) > > >> And the documentation for this is quite vague, I'm worried how do we > >> get similarly working drivers? Let's say if I were to implement a > >> user space application for this, or a driver implementation for that > >> matter, it would be a guessing game for me. For example, what's > >> "soon" in this context? 5 mins, 50 secs or 5 secs? Can the mac80211 operation > sleep? > >> > > > > I understand this is not clear. The intention was to say that by the > > time the interface is enabled, the interface type might change, and > > that the driver should be aware of that. I can try to better express > > this in the command and documentation. > > > >> So user space is now always supposed to always call this nl80211 > >> command and at what stage exactly? Or is it optional? But if it's > >> optional what's the point of adding it? > >> > > > > It is optional. User space should use it when it expects the interface > > type to change before the interface is activated. > > If this is optional for user space (wpasupplicant, iwd etc.) then the driver cannot > rely on it being called, no? So this command cannot be used for anything > important because it's optional. Also I'm worried how this will give a different > user experience based on if the user space calls this optional command or not. > > The way I see that this is designed just to workaround one iwlwifi bug, not really > as a generic nl80211 command which could be useful for all drivers. But I'm more > than happy to be proven wrong! > It was more an attempt to tell the driver what to expect, so it could prepare itself for the upcoming flows. Since as you mentioned the API is clear in a way that can be used by the drivers, we can drop this patch. I'll try to work on an solution that doesn't involve user space. Thanks for your inputs and feedback. Regards, Ilan.
