On 9/9/24 02:35, Kalle Valo wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>
> Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> From: Ajay Singh <ajay.kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Add support for the WILC3000 chip. The chip is similar to WILC1000,
>> except that the register layout is slightly different and it does
>> not support WPA3/SAE.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ajay Singh <ajay.kathat@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Vasut <marex@xxxxxxx>
>
> [...]
>
>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/cfg80211.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/microchip/wilc1000/cfg80211.c
>> @@ -313,6 +313,13 @@ static int connect(struct wiphy *wiphy, struct net_device *dev,
>>
>> vif->connecting = true;
>>
>> + if (sme->auth_type == NL80211_AUTHTYPE_SAE &&
>> + is_wilc3000(vif->wilc->chipid)) {
>> + netdev_err(dev, "WILC3000: WPA3 not supported\n");
>> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
>> + goto out_error;
>> + }
>
> This looks wrong. If wilc3000 doesn't support SAE you shouldn't
> advertise NL80211_FEATURE_SAE to user space. I think the check for
> wilc3000 should be in wilc_create_wiphy():
>
Actually, the chip ID is not available when wilc_create_wiphy() is called but
is set later in the device probe function. Therefore, adding the
'is_wilc3000(vif->wilc->chipid)' condition may not work as expected.
Also, I think there is no API to change "wiphy->features" after wiphy is
registered to set it later when chip ID information is available.
Does it make sense to add a module parameter for device type(wilc1000 or
wilc3000) to address device-specific featurization.
> if (!is_wilc3000(vif->wilc->chipid))
> wiphy->features |= NL80211_FEATURE_SAE;
>
> --
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/
>
> https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatches
