On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 17:58, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 17:53 +0200, Arik Nemtsov wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 17:31, Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 16:35 +0200, Arik Nemtsov wrote:
>> Actually wl12xx "supports" the legacy way as well. We can operate
>> without wpa_s explicitly setting the probe-resp (even though we just
>> piece it together in other ways).
>> In this sense, it's not a mandatory feature. If wpa_s fails to
>> generate it for some reason, we don't want it to fail the AP load. The
>> AP will operate just fine.
>
> It'll operate, not sure about "just fine" :-) The way I see it that's
> mostly a backward compatibility feature, no?
I guess so. I can make the wording more explicit there so as not to confuse.
>
>> >> +++ b/include/net/cfg80211.h
>> >> @@ -1693,6 +1693,7 @@ enum wiphy_flags {
>> >> WIPHY_FLAG_AP_UAPSD = BIT(14),
>> >> WIPHY_FLAG_SUPPORTS_TDLS = BIT(15),
>> >> WIPHY_FLAG_TDLS_EXTERNAL_SETUP = BIT(16),
>> >> + WIPHY_FLAG_SUPPORT_PROBE_RESP_OFFLOAD = BIT(17),
>> >
>> > Ditto here, maybe WIPHY_FLAG_HAS_PROBE_RESP_OFFLOAD?
sure.
>> >
>> > As we discussed, ath6kl & similar full-mac drivers with AP SME in the
>> > device should set this to advertise the probe protocol feature set they
>> > support (by passing up), and even for wl12xx it's not optional.
>>
>> All this has to do with user-space semantics. Currently hostap always
>> sets the probe-resp IEs, without checking offloading support.
>
> Which is fine too, but I think ath6kl should set this value right?
I'll add this to the kernel side for now, with no checks in hostap.
Arik
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
