[PATCH v2 00/23] Support for new regulatory flags and P2P GO channel

Peer, Ilan ilan.peer
Sun Jun 21 12:00:21 PDT 2015

Hi Jouni,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jouni Malinen [mailto:j at w1.fi]
> Sent: Saturday, June 20, 2015 13:58
> To: Peer, Ilan
> Cc: hostap at lists.shmoo.com
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/23] Support for new regulatory flags and P2P GO
> channel
> On Wed, Apr 01, 2015 at 08:26:57PM +0000, Peer, Ilan wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 26, 2014 at 01:52:03AM +0300, Jouni Malinen wrote:
> > > > I'm finally trying to find enough time to go through this set. As
> > > > an initial step, I rebased this on top of the current master
> > > > branch and applied the clear cases for which I had no questions
> > > > (or dependencies on commits with open questions).
> > >
> > > Well, that did not get that far.. Trying again. The latest rebased
> > > and a bit cleaned up set of the remaining patches is here:
> > > http://w1.fi/p/p2p-go-regulatory-flags/
> > >
> >
> > These look ok with the exception of the attached patches that fixes an issue
> I encountered while testing this with a single channel. Also did some testing
> with 2 channels.
> It looks like this is just not going to happen with the remaining set of the
> patches.. My main concern is on the concurrent GO rule changes and indoor
> operation related rules. I tried to push those to the end of the patch set and
> to pull in the other commits, but that did not succeed either since there are
> number of changes in behavior which I don't think I agree with and well, at
> minimum, they would require hwsim test case changes to maker things pass
> again (about 10 test cases fail with these applied).
> In other words, I think I'm going to give up trying. I pushed the current
> rebased version here http://w1.fi/p/p2p-go-regulatory/ and I'm dropping the
> old patches from my pending queue.
> If you still want to get some of these in, please split the attempt to three parts
> (things that do not touch regulatory rules, things that allow something extra
> for GO based on an association, things that have something to do with indoor
> rules). We can then go through those subsets one-by-one and see if I can
> agree with the changes. With each subset, there should be updates to hwsim
> test cases or verification that no failures are added.

Thanks for not giving up on these. I'll see how can make this better. I think that I'll focus mostly on the channel switch cases and also try to add the real channel switch support. 

Once again, thanks for spending them time on this.


More information about the Hostap mailing list