Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-189178-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 139.178.88.99 as permitted sender) client-ip=139.178.88.99;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240418060626.431202-1-yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> <20240418060626.431202-2-yu-hao.lin@nxp.com>
 <Zk6TklTIbxZxIWyb@google.com> <PA4PR04MB9638DC958102D07A7B7084B6D1F52@PA4PR04MB9638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <CA+ASDXOE2Pwv3kRhwkAd1e3+U8zxZi7cX0TeLDkycQya9xkdPA@mail.gmail.com> <PA4PR04MB963875C85CFFA0EE2E914BEAD1F52@PA4PR04MB9638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <PA4PR04MB963875C85CFFA0EE2E914BEAD1F52@PA4PR04MB9638.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 15:54:48 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+ASDXMzHRs=CeyVeMbY44ornTa7f8G3ek3bFeyX39QAwr5bog@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v10 1/2] wifi: mwifiex: add host mlme for client mode
To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com>
Cc: "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>, 
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, "kvalo@kernel.org" <kvalo@kernel.org>, 
	"francesco@dolcini.it" <francesco@dolcini.it>, Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>, 
	Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 24, 2024 at 3:01=E2=80=AFPM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrot=
e:
> 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