From: James Prestwood <prestwoj@gmail.com>
To: Denis Kenzior <denkenz@gmail.com>, iwd@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] dpp: initial version of PKEX enrollee support
Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2023 07:14:21 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <030ba167-35a5-4095-89fe-6be875c709d7@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6e709910-ad9a-4681-83bd-759a4e26e53b@gmail.com>
Hi Denis,
On 11/8/23 7:07 AM, Denis Kenzior wrote:
> Hi James,
>
>>> Since you're sharing the DPP state machine object between the two
>>> interfaces, it seems like starting PKEX on the SharedCode interface
>>> side-effects the state of the regular DeviceProvisioning interface?
>>> I hope that's not intended?
>>
>> Your right, it does. Once PKEX finishes it starts DPP on the
>> DeviceProvisioning interface. This was intended, but if we want to
>> keep the two isolated I'll have to change gears and think about how we
>> can do it.
>
> Ugh :) This is something no-one but the person who wrote the code would
> expect to happen. The interfaces should be kept separate.
>
> Internal implementation wise, I think you probably can get away with a
> shared dpp state machine object, but you do have to track which
> 'interface' the state machine is actually bound to at the time.
Ok, if your fine with this its much easier to implement than separate
objects per interface, i.e. store an enum that corresponds to the
interface using the SM.
>
>>
>> May have to create a dpp_sm for each DBus interface not
>> per-wdev/netdev, and find some way of communicating which interface
>> the property changed calls correspond to.
>>
>
> Well, there's always dpp_find or dpp_pkex_find.
>
>> Apart from the string/cast comments the rest seem to revolve around
>> the shared state between PKEX/DPP. If separating them is the way we
>> want to go I can do that.
>>
>
> I didn't look super closely at the spec details, but what I saw seemed
> reasonable.
>
> Regards,
> -Denis
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-08 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-07 17:06 [PATCH v4 0/4] DPP PKEX Changes James Prestwood
2023-11-07 17:06 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] doc: PKEX support for DPP James Prestwood
2023-11-08 2:28 ` Denis Kenzior
2023-11-07 17:06 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] dpp: initial version of PKEX enrollee support James Prestwood
2023-11-08 3:11 ` Denis Kenzior
2023-11-08 12:42 ` James Prestwood
2023-11-08 15:07 ` Denis Kenzior
2023-11-08 15:14 ` James Prestwood [this message]
2023-11-07 17:06 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] dpp: initial version of PKEX configurator support James Prestwood
2023-11-07 17:06 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] dpp: Add StartConfigurator, PKEX agent support James Prestwood
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=030ba167-35a5-4095-89fe-6be875c709d7@gmail.com \
--to=prestwoj@gmail.com \
--cc=denkenz@gmail.com \
--cc=iwd@lists.linux.dev \
/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 read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).