Message-ID: <1369682153.14740.27.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20130527_211608_900613_E66581ED)
Subject: Re: P2P Device support: how to deal with p2p_no_group_iface option
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>
Cc: Arend van Spriel <arend@broadcom.com>,
	"hostap@lists.shmoo.com" <hostap@lists.shmoo.com>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	Jithu Jance <jithu@broadcom.com>
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 21:15:53 +0200
In-Reply-To: <20130527181112.GA20210@w1.fi>
References: <51A09F43.5030004@broadcom.com>
	 <1369645418.8229.17.camel@jlt4.sipsolutions.net>
	 <51A36603.7020403@broadcom.com> <20130527181112.GA20210@w1.fi>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, 2013-05-27 at 21:11 +0300, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> On Mon, May 27, 2013 at 03:56:19PM +0200, Arend van Spriel wrote:
> > In this mac80211_hwsim is a special case. We could make P2P_DEVICE
> > support in mac80211_hwsim optional using module parameter to allow
> > testing both cases.
> 
> Yes, that would be helpful. I don't understand why my test setup moves
> to using P2P Device by default when mac80211_hwsim is perfectly capable
> of operating without that.. [...]
> 
> In general, I don't think it is a good idea to change existing behavior
> with a kernel or wpa_supplicant upgrade. It is obviously fine if this is
> needed for the functionality to work in the first place, but that is not
> the case with mac80211_hwsim.

It's kinda a side effect of having "I support P2P-Device" also mean "I
want P2P-Device to be used", but for everything other than hwsim that
seems like the only reasonable choice, so ... I wouldn't mind changing
the default in hwsim though to not support/desire P2P-Device w/o a
configuration option or so.

johannes