Return-path: Received: from mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com ([216.31.210.64]:58965 "EHLO mail-gw3-out.broadcom.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751512AbaLXUkM (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Dec 2014 15:40:12 -0500 Message-ID: <549B24A9.4080001@broadcom.com> (sfid-20141224_214016_714216_DDC0BD4C) Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 21:40:09 +0100 From: Arend van Spriel MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jouni Malinen CC: "hostap@lists.shmoo.com" , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , Kalle Valo , "Gautam (Gautam Kumar) Shukla" Subject: Re: hostapd and 11h support References: <549A8827.3070703@broadcom.com> <20141224173227.GA1969@w1.fi> <549B05F0.9020704@broadcom.com> <20141224190452.GA6933@w1.fi> In-Reply-To: <20141224190452.GA6933@w1.fi> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 12/24/14 20:04, Jouni Malinen wrote: > On Wed, Dec 24, 2014 at 07:29:04PM +0100, Arend van Spriel wrote: >> The firmware on the device *can* have CAC logic built-in. When it >> *is* built-in it is however disabled by default. Based on your >> feedback I will just detect firmware support, enable dfs in >> firmware, and signal DFS offload to hostapd. I would suggest >> introducing a new common capability flag for this instead of using a >> QCA vendor specific one. That would be odd ;-) > > I see nothing odd in other drivers using the already defined QCA vendor > specific nl80211 command. Anyway, I have no issues with a new nl80211 > capability flag added for this purpose. You'll probably have better > chances of getting that accepted with an upstream driver using it. Maybe not odd but counter-intuitive to some people. Anyway, I was looking at the code in driver_nl80211_capa.c and stumbled upon WPA_DRIVER_FLAGS_KEY_MGMT_OFFLOAD. I introduced entensible feature flags upstream just yesterday to accomodate this type of offload. Just curious but are those QCA vendor specific nl80211 commands used by the upstream QCA drivers or is this for supporting QCA proprietary drivers. I guess the latter as that would be the only reason I can think of to have vendor specific commands. Regards, Arend