Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Message-ID: <1a063de0aba4a6e2bcf5cacaa661ca8b73c1ffad.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC 3/4] wifi: nl80211: validate RU puncturing bitmap
From:   Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To:     Aloka Dixit <quic_alokad@quicinc.com>,
        Muna Sinada <quic_msinada@quicinc.com>
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2023 10:20:13 +0100
In-Reply-To: <0b77bad5-f55c-73d5-7cd0-dfed57871f25@quicinc.com>
References: <1670006154-6092-1-git-send-email-quic_msinada@quicinc.com>
         <1670006154-6092-4-git-send-email-quic_msinada@quicinc.com>
         <3df39d4f2e2e64bd3899cfbe7bade547e54330f7.camel@sipsolutions.net>
         <0b77bad5-f55c-73d5-7cd0-dfed57871f25@quicinc.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.3 (3.46.3-1.fc37) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Precedence: bulk

Hi Aloka,

> Secondly, this RFC uses ieee80211_valid_disable_subchannel_bitmap()=20
> defined in following RFC you sent:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/20220325140859.=
e48bf244f157.I3547481d49f958389f59dfeba3fcc75e72b0aa6e@changeid/

Yes, I saw that.

> Is there is any plan for the next version?

Am I correct that by basing your work here on top of that, you're OK
with that being included, and we've concluded the discussion about where
and how the puncturing bitmap should be stored? This patchset was an
RFC, I'm personally happy with the design, but really also want to hear
your opinion and perspective on it.


Anyway if that's the case then I'll go and resubmit the patch - we also
made some more fixes to it since, I think. I'm not sure I'll get to it
today, but I'll do it soon.

johannes