From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Pradeep Kumar Chitrapu <pradeepc@codeaurora.org>,
Lior David <liord@codeaurora.org>,
luca@coelho.fi, Etan Cohen <etancohen@google.com>,
Roy Want <roywant@google.com>,
Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v3] cfg80211: add peer measurement with FTM API
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 12:41:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1539340898.3141.11.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dc9bc6d3-6a95-3ca5-a231-14ed3e2fe302@broadcom.com> (sfid-20181012_123207_395276_6619BC73)
> You have no recollection what happened in the earlier versions, right? :-p
v1 was very incomplete, it didn't have any results reporting, etc.
> > v3:
> > - add a bit to report "final" for partial results
> > - remove list keeping etc. and just unicast out the results
> > to the requester (big code reduction ...)
> > - also send complete message unicast, and as a result
> > remove the multicast group
> > - separate out struct cfg80211_pmsr_ftm_request_peer
> > from struct cfg80211_pmsr_request_peer
> > - document timeout == 0 if no timeout
> > - disallow setting timeout nl80211 attribute to 0,
> > must not include attribute for no timeout
>
> All these negations make my head spin (a little). Let's look at the
> actual documentation further down...
:-)
> > +struct cfg80211_pmsr_ftm_result {
> > + const u8 *lci;
> > + const u8 *civicloc;
> > + unsigned int lci_len;
> > + unsigned int civicloc_len;
> > + enum nl80211_peer_measurement_ftm_failure_reasons failure_reason;
> > + u32 num_ftmr_attempts, num_ftmr_successes;
>
> Maybe there is a good reason, but can we move the above line a bit down...
The reason was to avoid having padding for alignment.
> > + NL80211_ATTR_TIMEOUT,
> > +
>
> Guess you consider reuse of the TIMEOUT attribute?
Yes, I was actually surprised we don't have one already :-)
> I checked the policy
> definition in nl80211_policy so it disallows 0 value as mentioned in the
> changelog. How about adding that to the documentation here, ie. "when
> timeout attribute is not provided the timeout is disabled for the given
> operation" or something like that.
Sure, that makes sense, will do.
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-10-12 10:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-12 10:08 [RFC v3] cfg80211: add peer measurement with FTM API Johannes Berg
2018-10-12 10:32 ` Arend van Spriel
2018-10-12 10:41 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2018-10-12 10:48 ` Arend van Spriel
2018-10-13 9:55 ` Kalle Valo
2018-10-15 7:29 ` Johannes Berg
2018-10-29 14:56 ` Kalle Valo
2018-10-16 9:15 ` Johannes Berg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1539340898.3141.11.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=etancohen@google.com \
--cc=franky.lin@broadcom.com \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liord@codeaurora.org \
--cc=luca@coelho.fi \
--cc=pradeepc@codeaurora.org \
--cc=roywant@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).