Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: cfg80211: Use WSEC to set SAE password

From: Eric Curtin <ecurtin@redhat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st>, Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	 Daniel Berlin <dberlin@dberlin.org>,
	Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com>,
	 Arend van Spriel <aspriel@gmail.com>,
	Franky Lin <franky.lin@broadcom.com>,
	 Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@broadcom.com>,
	SHA-cyfmac-dev-list@infineon.com,  asahi@lists.linux.dev,
	brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@broadcom.com,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org,
	 David Airlie <airlied@redhat.com>,
	Daniel Vetter <daniel@ffwll.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: cfg80211: Use WSEC to set SAE password
Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2023 11:32:56 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAOgh=FyX5tfzB+yN17pYQGy=8pBy4hmL-jc4cMZexzdp=aZSdg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHk-=whDLKZZEuxU_jEhZRdeWjXAkL8=J_JRk2Ar6wp9UK3h2w@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 at 01:54, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Dec 2023 at 16:06, Hector Martin <marcan@marcan.st> wrote:
> >
> > On 2023/12/19 23:42, Kalle Valo wrote:
> > >
> > > Why is it that every patch Hector submits seems to end up with flame
> > > wars?
>
> Well, I do think some of it is Hector's personality and forceful
> approaches, but I do think part of it is also the area in question.
>
> Because I do agree with Hector that..
>
> > Just recently a patch was posted to remove the Infineon list from
> > MAINTAINERS because that company cares so little they have literally
> > stopped accepting emails from us. Meanwhile they are telling their
> > customers that they do not recommend upstream brcmfmac and they should
> > use their downstream driver [1].
>
> Unquestionably broadcom is not helping maintain things, and I think it
> should matter.
>
> As Hector says, they point to their random driver dumps on their site
> that you can't even download unless you are a "Broadcom community
> member" or whatever, and hey - any company that works that way should
> be seen as pretty much hostile to any actual maintenance and proper
> development.
>
> If Daniel and Hector are responsive to actual problem reports for the
> changes they cause, I do think that should count a lot.
>
> I don't think Cypress support should necessarily be removed (or marked
> broken), but if the sae_password code already doesn't work, _that_
> part certainly shouldn't hold things up?
>
> Put another way: if we effectively don't have a driver maintainer that
> can test things, and somebody is willing to step up, shouldn't we take
> that person up on it?

I am trying to help try and find a maintainer in the community, but of
course I can't guarantee anything. Theoretically of course it should
be someone from Broadcom, Raspberry Pi, etc. and not the community
(not that this helps unblock us promptly).

I just would like to say this upstream Cypress driver has a large
number of users via Fedora and CentOS Stream Automotive Distribution.
And that's just the Fedora family of distros. But the Apple Silicon
devices have a pretty large amount of users also.

We need to find a way of accommodating both. If that's either fork the
code into two separate files somehow or find another maintainer, I
don't know (just my uninformed opinion).

Is mise le meas/Regards,

Eric Curtin

>
>                   Linus
>