Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless+bounces-3944-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Message-ID: <df35ce71-84dd-4c2c-af9a-820cb9a71291@quicinc.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2024 09:56:12 +0800
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: ath11k multicast action frame RX
Content-Language: en-US
To: James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com>,
        "open list:MEDIATEK MT76 WIRELESS
 LAN DRIVER" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
        <ath11k@lists.infradead.org>
References: <dcdbd757-ad6e-4fe0-a0c1-fe328431b73b@locusrobotics.com>
 <642b61a6-e3c0-4831-887f-f25314bf166d@locusrobotics.com>
 <90ac3bdc-8797-4d57-8bc9-48e0ad406674@quicinc.com>
 <1dafe0e5-292b-4764-86c7-cc1757aeb3b6@gmail.com>
 <ed8eeb92-e1eb-445e-989d-2340c26faf44@quicinc.com>
 <7a62031b-ad1f-4da2-8217-19a5d7fdc0f4@gmail.com>
 <f363f179-b41f-4bea-882f-e4aacb8ad519@quicinc.com>
 <eaeb8e9b-3809-4f89-a5b2-7949aa01fbde@gmail.com>
 <026d9ba3-525d-4a12-8d03-5fece818330c@quicinc.com>
 <0e8ad2c2-cc39-4903-97f7-c3ffb525e61a@gmail.com>
From: Baochen Qiang <quic_bqiang@quicinc.com>
In-Reply-To: <0e8ad2c2-cc39-4903-97f7-c3ffb525e61a@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


On 2/22/2024 11:38 PM, James Prestwood wrote:
> Hi Baochen,
> 
> On 2/21/24 6:26 PM, Baochen Qiang wrote:
>> But you are using monitor mode, not station mode, on ath10k, right? 
> 
> No I'm using station mode. It looks like ath10k creates a monitor device 
> to receive these frames (that was already done before my patch), but the 
> interface I'm using from userspace is a regular station interface
> 
OK let's forget what ath10k does to receiver those frames for now and 
focus on ath11k. From what I got from firmware team, it's expected that 
ath11k station interface can't get those frame without a scan because 
device A is connected to an AP already and is supposed to get frames 
only from within the BSS, apparently device B here is not within that BSS.

> Thanks,
> 
> James
>