From: Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>
To: Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>,
Jouni Malinen <j@w1.fi>, Eric Blau <eblau@eblau.com>
Cc: hostap@lists.infradead.org,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Subject: Re: Kernel oops / WiFi connection failure with wpa_supplicant 2.7
Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2019 11:44:03 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1cefde13-3fcf-47b7-1c3a-e44a2901ddea@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41e7ccaf-c73d-b404-69fe-ad17433add37@broadcom.com>
Hi Arend,
> However, there is more to it. When these offloads were introduced, we
> discussed about having a PORT_AUTHORIZED event or not. It was decided
> passing an attribute in CONNECT and ROAMED event would suffice and that
> is what was implemented in brcmfmac. However, it seems time passed and
> the need for an explicit PORT_AUTHORIZED was there (probably Denis
> knows), which wpa_supplicant now supports thus ignoring the attribute in
> the CONNECT and ROAMED events. The brcmfmac driver was not changed
> accordingly. For this there are patches pending in linux-wireless which
> are necessary to have a working connection.
>
Coming in a bit late to this discussion, but it does raise a few points
I wouldn't mind some clarification on:
- With commit 503c1fb98ba3, the kernel effectively changed the userspace
API. So I take it that breaking userspace APIs are OK sometimes? If so,
I have lots of suggestions to make ;)
- Is RTNL LINK_MODE / OPER_STATE status being (supposed to be?) affected
by the driver during a roam? E.g. if we're in a 802.1X network with
userspace authentication, and driver roamed requiring a new 802.1X auth,
then in theory the RTNL mode needs to be brought back out of UP state...
- The new API leaves a lot to be desired in terms of race conditions.
For example, how long should userspace wait for EAPoL-EAP packets to
arrive (before triggering its own EAPoL-Start for example) if a
CMD_ROAMED event comes?
- What happens if userspace does send an EAPoL-Start in the middle of an
offloaded 4-way handshake?
Regards,
-Denis
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-01-08 17:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CADU241PtPeiTQWHwb=uF6Ohuua_asOwCarCAKVC8jdVVNAsByA@mail.gmail.com>
[not found] ` <20190103154921.GA25015@w1.fi>
2019-01-05 19:44 ` Kernel oops / WiFi connection failure with wpa_supplicant 2.7 Arend Van Spriel
2019-01-08 17:44 ` Denis Kenzior [this message]
2019-01-14 20:12 ` Arend Van Spriel
2019-01-14 21:18 ` Denis Kenzior
2019-01-14 23:04 ` Arend Van Spriel
2019-01-15 13:00 ` Johannes Berg
2019-01-15 15:55 ` Denis Kenzior
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=1cefde13-3fcf-47b7-1c3a-e44a2901ddea@gmail.com \
--to=denkenz@gmail.com \
--cc=arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com \
--cc=eblau@eblau.com \
--cc=hostap@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=j@w1.fi \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
/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).