linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host mlme

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <ZftVAiArz_qu1jur@google.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2024 14:28:34 -0700
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>
Cc: Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>, tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com,
	rafael.beims@...adex.com,
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host mlme

On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 11:24:34AM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> Francesco Dolcini <francesco@...cini.it> writes:
> 
> > Hello Brian (and Kalle),
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 06, 2024 at 10:00:51AM +0800, David Lin wrote:
> >> This series add host based MLME support to the mwifiex driver, this
> >> enables WPA3 support in both client and AP mode.
> >
> > What's your plan for this series? I know you raised some concern when
> > this started months ago and I'd love to know if there is something that
> > would need to be addressed to move forward here.
> 
> Based on the history of this patchset I am a bit concerned if these
> patches break existing setups. I'm sure Brian will look at that in
> detail but more test results from different setups we have the better.

It looks like the latest patches generally avoid touching behavior for
devices without this feature-set. And I've given it a bit of a whirl
myself, although I have a pretty blind eye to AP-mode as my systems tend
to be clients.

Yes, testing is always a concern for invasive changes, but I think we're
in OK shape at least w.r.t. regressing existing setups. Or, I won't
provide an Acked-by until I'm happy.

Brian