Return-path: Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([5.9.151.49]:39580 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750925AbdCNNw0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Mar 2017 09:52:26 -0400 Message-ID: <1489499543.10872.5.camel@sipsolutions.net> (sfid-20170314_145705_758148_25B25F3D) Subject: Re: [PATCH] cfg80211: support 4-way handshake offloading for WPA/WPA2-PSK From: Johannes Berg To: Arend Van Spriel , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Cc: Eliad Peller , Andrei Otcheretianski , Avraham Stern Date: Tue, 14 Mar 2017 14:52:23 +0100 In-Reply-To: <5f34db3e-1d68-71aa-07b2-5296eaa9f533@broadcom.com> (sfid-20170309_143857_819168_765E6ED5) References: <20170221100957.30965-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net> <231f969e-eac1-3196-07c2-80e37e6dda55@broadcom.com> <1487673603.2215.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> <1487677574.2215.4.camel@sipsolutions.net> <96cd71c3-c279-b298-3876-68bac7297dc4@broadcom.com> <1488543681.25750.3.camel@sipsolutions.net> <5f34db3e-1d68-71aa-07b2-5296eaa9f533@broadcom.com> (sfid-20170309_143857_819168_765E6ED5) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: > So the 4-way hs offload patches in wpa_s RFC do not make distinction > between 1X and WPA-PSK. Can we expect drivers to support one, but not > the other? In other words do we need the flexibility in nl80211? You tell me :) We're implementing both. Andrei also raised this question on the wpa_s patches at my request, and nobody commented. I can live with combining them, but nobody better complain about it when they just implement one of them on their device ... :) johannes