Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E3A8C10F12 for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 17:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 270862075B for ; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 17:03:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727744AbfDORDR (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:03:17 -0400 Received: from s3.sipsolutions.net ([144.76.43.62]:42684 "EHLO sipsolutions.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726740AbfDORDQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Apr 2019 13:03:16 -0400 Received: by sipsolutions.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1hG50k-0001cv-Bv; Mon, 15 Apr 2019 19:03:14 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] wireless: Support auth-at-ms timer in sta-info From: Johannes Berg To: Ben Greear , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2019 19:03:12 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20190412213710.17292-1-greearb@candelatech.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-2.fc28) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2019-04-15 at 09:32 -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > On 4/15/19 4:15 AM, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Fri, 2019-04-12 at 14:37 -0700, greearb@candelatech.com wrote: > > > From: Ben Greear > > > > > > Report time stamp of when sta became authenticated. > > > > You didn't actually implement this ;-) > > > > Did you mean associated? > > > > > + * @auth_at_ms: time in ms of the last assoc -> auth transition. > > > > There's commonly not really such a transition? > > Oh, I guess AUTHORIZED is only when doing .1x authentication? My test case > was (luckly?) doing that, so I didn't notice the bug. Oh, you meant *authorized*... Most of the code uses "auth" == "authenticated" :-) johannes