| Message ID | 20240418060626.431202-1-yu-hao.lin@nxp.com |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host mlme | expand |
On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 02:06:25PM +0800, David Lin wrote: > Add host based MLME to enable WPA3 functionalities in client mode. > This feature required a firmware with the corresponding V2 Key API > support. The feature (WPA3) is currently enabled and verified only > on IW416. Also, verified no regression with change when host MLME > is disabled. > > Signed-off-by: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Reviewed-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> ... > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.c b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.c > index 745b1d925b21..3817c08a1507 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/marvell/mwifiex/util.c > @@ -417,6 +456,47 @@ mwifiex_process_mgmt_packet(struct mwifiex_private *priv, ... > + mwifiex_dbg > + (priv->adapter, MSG, > + "assoc: receive disassoc from %pM\n", > + ieee_hdr->addr3); The way you indented this does not seems kernel coding style compliant ... however checkpatch does not complain ... so maybe I am just wrong. In case you need to send a new version, please keep the open parenthesis together with the function name mwifiex_dbg(priv->adapter, MSG, "assoc: receive disassoc from %pM\n", ieee_hdr->addr3); (yes, it's 81 column - and it's fine). Again, IMHO, do not send a v11 just for this trivial change. Francesco
Hi David, >>> With host mlme: >>> Tested-by: <rafael.beims@toradex.com> #Verdin AM62 IW416 SD Without >>> host mlme: >>> Tested-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> # >>> 88W8997-SD >>> >>> This series add host based MLME support to the mwifiex driver, this >>> enables WPA3 support in both client and AP mode. >>> To enable WPA3, a firmware with corresponding V2 Key API support is >>> required. >>> The feature is currently only enabled on NXP IW416 (SD8978), and it >>> was internally validated by NXP QA team. Other NXP Wi-Fi chips >>> supported in current mwifiex are not affected by this change. >> >> I am a bit confused here. If this is just for WPA3 support, then wasn’t this >> suppose to be solved with external_auth support? >> >> Regards >> >> Marcel > > FW can't support WPA3. In order to support WPA3, driver should leverage MLME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > This patch is used to let MLME is running by wpa_supplicant and hostapd instead of handling by FW. as I said, isn’t external_auth exactly meant for this? Regards Marcel
> From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2024 5:15 PM > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; > briannorris@chromium.org; Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; > francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims > <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; Francesco Dolcini > <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or > opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report > this email' button > > > Hi David, > > >>> With host mlme: > >>> Tested-by: <rafael.beims@toradex.com> #Verdin AM62 IW416 SD > Without > >>> host mlme: > >>> Tested-by: Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> # > >>> 88W8997-SD > >>> > >>> This series add host based MLME support to the mwifiex driver, this > >>> enables WPA3 support in both client and AP mode. > >>> To enable WPA3, a firmware with corresponding V2 Key API support is > >>> required. > >>> The feature is currently only enabled on NXP IW416 (SD8978), and it > >>> was internally validated by NXP QA team. Other NXP Wi-Fi chips > >>> supported in current mwifiex are not affected by this change. > >> > >> I am a bit confused here. If this is just for WPA3 support, then > >> wasn’t this suppose to be solved with external_auth support? > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Marcel > > > > FW can't support WPA3. In order to support WPA3, driver should leverage > MLME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > > This patch is used to let MLME is running by wpa_supplicant and hostapd > instead of handling by FW. > > as I said, isn’t external_auth exactly meant for this? > > Regards > > Marcel Can you let me know what does "external_auth" mean? David
On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 04:00:17AM +0000, David Lin wrote:
> Can you let me know what does "external_auth" mean?
Look around for NL80211_CMD_EXTERNAL_AUTH. It's in nl80211.h with plenty
of comments. (And also cfg80211_ops::cfg80211_ops,
cfg80211_external_auth_request, ...)
I've never looked at this interface before, personally. It seems to rely
on cfg80211_ops::mgmt_tx support too; that seems to exist in mwifiex,
although I have no clue the quality of support there.
Brian
> From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2024 5:42 AM > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle > Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; > Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or > opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report > this email' button > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 04:00:17AM +0000, David Lin wrote: > > Can you let me know what does "external_auth" mean? > > Look around for NL80211_CMD_EXTERNAL_AUTH. It's in nl80211.h with > plenty of comments. (And also cfg80211_ops::cfg80211_ops, > cfg80211_external_auth_request, ...) > > I've never looked at this interface before, personally. It seems to rely on > cfg80211_ops::mgmt_tx support too; that seems to exist in mwifiex, > although I have no clue the quality of support there. > > Brian Thanks for your information. If "external_auth" means only offloading SAE authentication to SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd (driver should hook cfg80211_ops. external_auth() to achieve this kind of offloading). Then it is not the same as the job done by this patch. This patch fully leverages SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. David
Hi Brian and Kalle, Johannes agreed that cfg80211 is the correct way for the development of mwifiex (mac80211 can't offload association process to driver/FW). This patch is used to fully leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd which can complete the missing WPA3 feature of mwifiex. The patch series had been reviewed and discussed. It looks like there is no more comments for patch v10. I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? David
Hi David, > Johannes agreed that cfg80211 is the correct way for the development of mwifiex > (mac80211 can't offload association process to driver/FW). that was never my question here. > This patch is used to fully leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd which can complete the missing WPA3 feature of mwifiex. > The patch series had been reviewed and discussed. It looks like there is no more comments for patch v10. > I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? If your hardware is a FullMac hardware then what is the point in now separating auth/assoc out. Is this done just for WPA3 or also for WPA2/WPA1. Are you no longer a FullMac hardware? You keep saying that you just want to support WPA3 and if previously the HW worked as FullMac hardware, then external_auth should be the way to go for having SAE handled by wpa_supplicant (or iwd for that matter). Now if you are fully embracing to auth/assoc and we can remove the support for the connect ops, then lets do it. However I don’t see anything properly described in the commit message. You keep saying WPA3 support and nothing else explain what the new Key V2 API of the firmware would do. Regards Marcel
> From: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Sent: Monday, April 22, 2024 4:35 PM > To: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; > LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; > francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims > <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; Francesco Dolcini > <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > > From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > > Sent: Saturday, April 20, 2024 5:42 AM > > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; > > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh > > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; > > Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support > > host mlme > > > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking > > links or opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using > > the 'Report this email' button > > > > > > On Fri, Apr 19, 2024 at 04:00:17AM +0000, David Lin wrote: > > > Can you let me know what does "external_auth" mean? > > > > Look around for NL80211_CMD_EXTERNAL_AUTH. It's in nl80211.h with > > plenty of comments. (And also cfg80211_ops::cfg80211_ops, > > cfg80211_external_auth_request, ...) > > > > I've never looked at this interface before, personally. It seems to > > rely on cfg80211_ops::mgmt_tx support too; that seems to exist in > > mwifiex, although I have no clue the quality of support there. > > > > Brian > > Thanks for your information. If "external_auth" means only offloading SAE > authentication to SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd (driver should hook > cfg80211_ops. external_auth() to achieve this kind of offloading). > Then it is not the same as the job done by this patch. > This patch fully leverages SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > > David Should I give more detail information about this question? BTW, if there are other blocked items to let this patch be accepted, please let me know. Thanks for your help. David
> From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> > Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2024 4:11 PM > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Cc: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org>; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; > LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; > francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims > <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; Francesco Dolcini > <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > Hi David, > > > Johannes agreed that cfg80211 is the correct way for the development > > of mwifiex > > (mac80211 can't offload association process to driver/FW). > > that was never my question here. > This is previous topic discussed with Johannes to confirm cfg80211 is correct decision for NXP FW. > > This patch is used to fully leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd > which can complete the missing WPA3 feature of mwifiex. > > The patch series had been reviewed and discussed. It looks like there is no > more comments for patch v10. > > I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? > > If your hardware is a FullMac hardware then what is the point in now > separating auth/assoc out. Is this done just for WPA3 or also for WPA2/WPA1. Yes. Our FW can's support WPA3, so this patch is used to hook separating auth/assoc to leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. WPA2 is also handled by SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > Are you no longer a FullMac hardware? You can check previous discussion with Johannes, FW still needs to involve association process, so mac80211 is not suitable for NXP FW. > > You keep saying that you just want to support WPA3 and if previously the HW > worked as FullMac hardware, then external_auth should be the way to go for > having SAE handled by wpa_supplicant (or iwd for that matter). Although external_auth is one way to support SAE, but we think hook separating auth/assoc will be the better way to resolve this issue. In this way, offloading SME to wpa_supplicant/hostpad will let any future changes be easy to support (we only need to check if there is anything that we should do when converting association request to the association command supported by FW). > > Now if you are fully embracing to auth/assoc and we can remove the support > for the connect ops, then lets do it. However I don’t see anything properly > described in the commit message. You keep saying WPA3 support and nothing > else explain what the new Key V2 API of the firmware would do. We give a flag to let user to decide to use connect ops or separating auth/assoc. We will remove connect ops for our new nxpwifi driver. New key V2 API supports more key solutions. > > Regards > > Marcel Thanks, David
Hi David,
On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 7:29 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrote:
> I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you?
I took another step back to see what Marcel had to say about
external_auth, as I was not familiar with it, and it didn't come up in
discussion with Johannes earlier. If we have agreement external_auth
is inappropriate, then I'll revisit v10. That may take some time
though, as I'll be preoccupied next week.
Brian
Hi David, On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 7:40 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrote: > > From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> > > > > Hi David, > > > > > Johannes agreed that cfg80211 is the correct way for the development > > > of mwifiex > > > (mac80211 can't offload association process to driver/FW). > > > > that was never my question here. > > > > This is previous topic discussed with Johannes to confirm cfg80211 is correct decision for NXP FW. To be clear: external_auth() is a cfg80211 feature. So this part of your response still isn't very relevant. > > > This patch is used to fully leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd > > which can complete the missing WPA3 feature of mwifiex. > > > The patch series had been reviewed and discussed. It looks like there is no > > more comments for patch v10. > > > I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? > > > > If your hardware is a FullMac hardware then what is the point in now > > separating auth/assoc out. Is this done just for WPA3 or also for WPA2/WPA1. > > Yes. Our FW can's support WPA3, so this patch is used to hook separating auth/assoc to > leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. WPA2 is also handled by SME of > wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > > > Are you no longer a FullMac hardware? > > You can check previous discussion with Johannes, FW still needs to involve association > process, so mac80211 is not suitable for NXP FW. For the record, that's the v9 thread, around here: https://lore.kernel.org/all/7a08dbcaded25ec0d32865647d571afbd66062fe.camel@sipsolutions.net/ > > You keep saying that you just want to support WPA3 and if previously the HW > > worked as FullMac hardware, then external_auth should be the way to go for > > having SAE handled by wpa_supplicant (or iwd for that matter). > > Although external_auth is one way to support SAE, but we think hook separating auth/assoc will > be the better way to resolve this issue. In this way, offloading SME to wpa_supplicant/hostpad will > let any future changes be easy to support (we only need to check if there is anything that we should > do when converting association request to the association command supported by FW). Perhaps I'm missing something (very likely), but I don't immediately see much difference (with respect to your FW API, and future extensibility) between external_auth() and your current solution (of intercepting auth()/assoc() and constructing your own AUTH frames). It mostly just means the AUTH mgmt frames will be coming in via NL80211_CMD_FRAME instead of being manually constructed within your .auth() hook. The external_auth() approach actually looks *more* natural than your current solution. How exactly does your solution make "future changes [easier] to support [than with external_auth]"? Do you not trust that wpa_supplicant will provide exactly the right NL80211_CMD_FRAME content you're looking for, and you need to tweak it to make your firmware happy? You're talking in extreme generality, which doesn't make it easy for me (and presumably Marcel) to understand why you're choosing one solution and rejecting another preexisting one. > > Now if you are fully embracing to auth/assoc and we can remove the support > > for the connect ops, then lets do it. However I don’t see anything properly > > described in the commit message. You keep saying WPA3 support and nothing > > else explain what the new Key V2 API of the firmware would do. > > We give a flag to let user to decide to use connect ops or separating auth/assoc. We will remove > connect ops for our new nxpwifi driver. New key V2 API supports more key solutions. To add to this: AFAIK, you don't even have "v2 API" firmware published for all chips that mwifiex currently supports, so even if we wanted to completely convert this driver, we can't do that today. Brian
> From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 9:00 AM > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; > LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; > francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims > <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; Francesco Dolcini > <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > Caution: This is an external email. Please take care when clicking links or > opening attachments. When in doubt, report the message using the 'Report > this email' button > > > Hi David, > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2024 at 7:29 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrote: > > I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? > > I took another step back to see what Marcel had to say about external_auth, as > I was not familiar with it, and it didn't come up in discussion with Johannes > earlier. If we have agreement external_auth is inappropriate, then I'll revisit > v10. That may take some time though, as I'll be preoccupied next week. > > Brian Thanks and take your time. David
> From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 9:09 AM > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle > Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; > Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > Hi David, > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 7:40 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrote: > > > From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > > Johannes agreed that cfg80211 is the correct way for the > > > > development of mwifiex > > > > (mac80211 can't offload association process to driver/FW). > > > > > > that was never my question here. > > > > > > > This is previous topic discussed with Johannes to confirm cfg80211 is > correct decision for NXP FW. > > To be clear: external_auth() is a cfg80211 feature. So this part of your > response still isn't very relevant. > Sorry I mean external_auth() is another way to let wpa_supplicant handle SAE, but it doesn’t necessarily mean we have to use external_auth for SAE. Our previous discussion has covered how current patch implemented using cfg80211 is valid. > > > > This patch is used to fully leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and > > > > hostapd > > > which can complete the missing WPA3 feature of mwifiex. > > > > The patch series had been reviewed and discussed. It looks like > > > > there is no > > > more comments for patch v10. > > > > I wonder can patch v10 be accepted by you? > > > > > > If your hardware is a FullMac hardware then what is the point in now > > > separating auth/assoc out. Is this done just for WPA3 or also for > WPA2/WPA1. > > > > Yes. Our FW can's support WPA3, so this patch is used to hook > > separating auth/assoc to leverage SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > > WPA2 is also handled by SME of wpa_supplicant and hostapd. > > > > > Are you no longer a FullMac hardware? > > > > You can check previous discussion with Johannes, FW still needs to > > involve association process, so mac80211 is not suitable for NXP FW. > > For the record, that's the v9 thread, around here: > > https://lore.ke/ > rnel.org%2Fall%2F7a08dbcaded25ec0d32865647d571afbd66062fe.camel%40 > sipsolutions.net%2F&data=05%7C02%7Cyu-hao.lin%40nxp.com%7Cd5f6edc4 > 9f8b45171e8508dc658d744f%7C686ea1d3bc2b4c6fa92cd99c5c301635%7C0% > 7C0%7C638496905433159887%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4 > wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7 > C%7C&sdata=eRuUVAXH%2B%2B27LeOo%2BHmGz%2Byc1QbuWl8f%2BbtSkE > 6SxUg%3D&reserved=0 > > > > You keep saying that you just want to support WPA3 and if previously > > > the HW worked as FullMac hardware, then external_auth should be the > > > way to go for having SAE handled by wpa_supplicant (or iwd for that > matter). > > > > Although external_auth is one way to support SAE, but we think hook > > separating auth/assoc will be the better way to resolve this issue. In > > this way, offloading SME to wpa_supplicant/hostpad will let any future > > changes be easy to support (we only need to check if there is anything that > we should do when converting association request to the association > command supported by FW). > > Perhaps I'm missing something (very likely), but I don't immediately see > much difference (with respect to your FW API, and future > extensibility) between external_auth() and your current solution (of > intercepting auth()/assoc() and constructing your own AUTH frames). It > mostly just means the AUTH mgmt frames will be coming in via > NL80211_CMD_FRAME instead of being manually constructed within your > .auth() hook. The external_auth() approach actually looks *more* natural > than your current solution. > > How exactly does your solution make "future changes [easier] to support > [than with external_auth]"? Do you not trust that wpa_supplicant will > provide exactly the right NL80211_CMD_FRAME content you're looking for, > and you need to tweak it to make your firmware happy? You're talking in > extreme generality, which doesn't make it easy for me (and presumably > Marcel) to understand why you're choosing one solution and rejecting > another preexisting one. 1. The process of external_auth should be as follows: a. cfg80211_ops.connect() is called to establish connection with remote AP. b. If authentication is not WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW will process authentication/association and reply connection result to cfg80211. c. If authentication is WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW should notify driver to call cfg80211_external_auth_request() to offload authentication to wpa_supplicant. d. FW will wait for authentication result passed by cfg80211_ops.external_auth() to decide if association should be processed with remote AP for the original connection request and reply connection result to cfg80211. NXP FW only supports association with or without authentication, it can't support external_auth. 2. Hook separating auth/assoc will offload SME to wpa_supplicant completely. Driver/FW don't need to involve the process of authentication just like external_auth did. There is no effort for driver/FW to support any future modifications of authentication process. David > > > > Now if you are fully embracing to auth/assoc and we can remove the > > > support for the connect ops, then lets do it. However I don’t see > > > anything properly described in the commit message. You keep saying > > > WPA3 support and nothing else explain what the new Key V2 API of the > firmware would do. > > > > We give a flag to let user to decide to use connect ops or separating > > auth/assoc. We will remove connect ops for our new nxpwifi driver. New > key V2 API supports more key solutions. > > To add to this: AFAIK, you don't even have "v2 API" firmware published for > all chips that mwifiex currently supports, so even if we wanted to completely > convert this driver, we can't do that today. > > > Brian
Hi Brian, > From: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 4:35 PM > To: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; Kalle > Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; > Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > Subject: RE: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support host > mlme > > > From: Brian Norris <briannorris@chromium.org> > > Sent: Friday, April 26, 2024 9:09 AM > > To: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > > Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>; > > linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org; LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; > > Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>; francesco@dolcini.it; Pete Hsieh > > <tsung-hsien.hsieh@nxp.com>; rafael.beims <rafael.beims@toradex.com>; > > Francesco Dolcini <francesco.dolcini@toradex.com> > > Subject: Re: [EXT] [PATCH v10 0/2] wifi: mwifiex: add code to support > > host mlme > > > > Hi David, > > > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 7:40 PM David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> wrote: > > > > From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> > > > > > > > > Hi David, > > > > > > Perhaps I'm missing something (very likely), but I don't immediately > > see much difference (with respect to your FW API, and future > > extensibility) between external_auth() and your current solution (of > > intercepting auth()/assoc() and constructing your own AUTH frames). It > > mostly just means the AUTH mgmt frames will be coming in via > > NL80211_CMD_FRAME instead of being manually constructed within your > > .auth() hook. The external_auth() approach actually looks *more* > > natural than your current solution. > > > > How exactly does your solution make "future changes [easier] to > > support [than with external_auth]"? Do you not trust that > > wpa_supplicant will provide exactly the right NL80211_CMD_FRAME > > content you're looking for, and you need to tweak it to make your > > firmware happy? You're talking in extreme generality, which doesn't > > make it easy for me (and presumably > > Marcel) to understand why you're choosing one solution and rejecting > > another preexisting one. > > 1. The process of external_auth should be as follows: > a. cfg80211_ops.connect() is called to establish connection with remote > AP. > b. If authentication is not WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW will process > authentication/association > and reply connection result to cfg80211. > c. If authentication is WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW should notify driver to call > cfg80211_external_auth_request() to offload authentication to > wpa_supplicant. > d. FW will wait for authentication result passed by > cfg80211_ops.external_auth() to > decide if association should be processed with remote AP for the original > connection > request and reply connection result to cfg80211. > NXP FW only supports association with or without authentication, it can't > support external_auth. > > 2. Hook separating auth/assoc will offload SME to wpa_supplicant > completely. Driver/FW don't need > to involve the process of authentication just like external_auth did. There > is no effort for driver/FW > to support any future modifications of authentication process. > > David > Can we confirm that hooking separating auth/assoc is more suitable than "external_auth" for mwifiex? David
On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 01:27:13AM +0000, David Lin wrote: > > From: David Lin <yu-hao.lin@nxp.com> > > Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2024 4:35 PM > > > > 1. The process of external_auth should be as follows: > > a. cfg80211_ops.connect() is called to establish connection with remote > > AP. > > b. If authentication is not WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW will process > > authentication/association > > and reply connection result to cfg80211. > > c. If authentication is WLAN_AUTH_SAE, FW should notify driver to call > > cfg80211_external_auth_request() to offload authentication to > > wpa_supplicant. FWIW, I expect you could just as well teach the driver to detect this -- I don't think we'd strictly require that firmware notify the driver. Essentially, you could teach the driver to notice any sort of CONNECT request (e.g., keep a list of FW-supported WLAN_AUTH_* modes?) that the firmware can't handle on its own, and begin the external_auth() process. I'm not sure this is ideal, but it does sound doable even without FW notification. > > d. FW will wait for authentication result passed by > > cfg80211_ops.external_auth() to > > decide if association should be processed with remote AP for the original > > connection > > request and reply connection result to cfg80211. > > NXP FW only supports association with or without authentication, it can't > > support external_auth. But could it support my above description? Basically, the driver decides whether to submit the connection request directly to the firmware, or go with external_auth() instead. > > 2. Hook separating auth/assoc will offload SME to wpa_supplicant > > completely. Driver/FW don't need > > to involve the process of authentication just like external_auth did. There > > is no effort for driver/FW > > to support any future modifications of authentication process. > > Can we confirm that hooking separating auth/assoc is more suitable than "external_auth" for mwifiex? I have one clarification question above. And I haven't heard anything more from Marcel, so assuming the above is clarified, I suppose we can drop the external_auth question. Brian