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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230719194039.16179-1-Chaitanya.Tata@nordicsemi.no>
 <2307e1741e9d32e8f1ffc4e83c73b63a4e32512b.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <CABPxzYJvAtgbrr_v6cMuKwFjzRjYOCDota+koYp-iogtJS75HQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABPxzY+_2DEK-wfAr1V9z1iHZky-7vF24mQx2yFgtFUoTdWgmw@mail.gmail.com> <e3d7cb8b891d1a54ffea60b5f8257208e03129d3.camel@sipsolutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <e3d7cb8b891d1a54ffea60b5f8257208e03129d3.camel@sipsolutions.net>
From:   Krishna Chaitanya <chaitanya.mgit@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 14 Aug 2023 01:56:56 +0530
Message-ID: <CABPxzYLp++vabPm9GZheg_UjofkJjm+kQZDRr9HXbX54bxptBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: Add support for sending BSSMaxIdle in association request
To:     Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc:     linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 3:11=E2=80=AFPM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolution=
s.net> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-08-11 at 00:17 +0530, Krishna Chaitanya wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 12:05=E2=80=AFAM Krishna Chaitanya
> > <chaitanya.mgit@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Aug 8, 2023 at 4:43=E2=80=AFPM Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsol=
utions.net> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, 2023-07-20 at 01:10 +0530, Chaitanya Tata wrote:
> > > > > When WNM is enabled, a station can send its preferred BSS maximum=
 idle
> > > > > period in the association request, add a new netlink attribute to=
 get
> > > > > this value from the supplicant and add BSS maximum idle IE in the
> > > > > association request.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > I don't see anything here that even requires all this code, rather =
than
> > > > wpa_s just including the element itself in the association request =
extra
> > > > IEs?
> > > Yeah, WPA supplicant can prepare this, please ignore, thanks.
>
> > Just remembered why I had to implement this in kernel, the associate/co=
nnect
> > data structure in wpa_s `wpa_driver_associate_params` doesn't have any
> > ies/extra_ies, it only gives wpa_ie and rest all are parameters for mac=
80211
> > to use. So, had just extended this as well, do you think we should add
> > this ies/extra_ies
> > to the association like we do for scan? Or as MLME is in mac80211,
> > just use this patch as is?
>
> Not sure I follow all that reasoning - is that something internal to
> wpa_supplicant? Fundamentally with my cfg/mac hat on I'm not sure I care
> so much about wpa_s internal data structures?
>
> Things like extended capabilities are also added to the "extra IEs" by
> wpa_s, so surely this would work too?

I was only pointing out that AFAIK there is no mechanism to pass "ies" in
the associate command from userspace, except for WPA IE.