linux-kernel - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: add host mlme for client mode

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:
 <PA4PR04MB963812F8835270C237DBCC55D1F62@PA4PR04MB9638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2024 11:24:22 +0000
From: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>
To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>, Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
CC: "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kvalo@...nel.org" <kvalo@...nel.org>, "francesco@...cini.it"
	<francesco@...cini.it>, Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com>, Francesco
 Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: add host mlme for client
 mode

> From: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>
> Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2024 8:51 AM
> To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
> Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> kvalo@...nel.org; francesco@...cini.it; Pete Hsieh
> <tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com>; Francesco Dolcini
> <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
> Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: add host mlme for client
> mode
> 
> Hi Brian,
> 
> > From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
> > Sent: Saturday, May 25, 2024 6:55 AM
> > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com>
> > Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> > kvalo@...nel.org; francesco@...cini.it; Pete Hsieh
> > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@....com>; Francesco Dolcini
> > <francesco.dolcini@...adex.com>
> > Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: add host mlme
> > for client mode
> >
> > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking
> > links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using
> > the 'Report this email' button
> >
> >
> > On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 3:01 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@....com> wrote:
> > > I think it needs time to support probe client. Can we put your
> > > suggested comments to the code used to hook probe_client() and add
> > >
> > > "TODO: support probe client" to mwifiex_cfg80211_probe_client().
> >
> > Are you suggesting that you plan to actually implement proper
> > probe_client support? Did you already do what I suggested, and
> > understand why hostapd needs probe_client support? This seems to be a
> > common pattern -- that reviewers are asking for you to do your
> > research, and it takes several requests before you actually do it.
> >
> > Now that I've tried to do that research for you ... it looks like
> > hostapd uses probe_client to augment TX MGMT acks, as a proxy for
> > station presence / inactivity. If a station is inactive and
> > non-responsive, we disconnect it eventually. So that looks to me like
> > probe_client support should actually be optional, if your driver
> > reports TX status? And in that case, I'd still recommend you try to fix
> hostapd.
> >
> > But if you're really planning to implement proper probe_client
> > support, then I suppose the TODO approach is also OK.
> >
> > I'd also request that you please actually do your research when
> > reviewers ask questions. I'm frankly not sure why I'm spending my time
> > on the above research, when the onus should be on the submitter to
> > explain why they're doing what they're doing.
> >
> > Brian
> 
> Yes. I know when aging time of station is out, hostapd will use probe_client
> to check if station is still there before really disconnect it.
> 
> Without this feature, it won't really affect mayor function of hostapd.
> 
> That is the reason that I suggest that we put comments and TODO to the
> code.
> 
> David

If you agree that this extra check can be optional, maybe I can just put your suggested comments to the code.

David