Hi Petr,
Op zaterdag 25 juli 2020 om 10u08 schreef Petr Štetiar <yn...@true.cz>:
m...@adrianschmutzler.de <m...@adrianschmutzler.de> [2020-07-24
17:36:08]:
Hi,
I would prefer to not touch ar71xx here, as this is essentially
only used
for backporting, and changing stuff would only make these backports
more
complicated, while not really providing a benefit. (I'm not sure
whether it
can be still built with master at all.)
ok, noted.
Despite, is my impression correct that this patchset won't affect
the size
of pure "tiny" targets, like ath79/tiny?
Good catch. It was all just done with git grep & sed replacing
wpad-basic with
wpad-basic-wolfssl, so this targets were missed as they're using
wpad-mini.
I read Adrian's reply as 'we'll keep ath79/tiny out of the wpad SSL
push?' but I
might be mistaken of course.
I'm going to switch those to wpad-basic-wolfssl variant as well,
since it
seems that the only difference is CONFIG_IEEE80211R=n in wpad-mini.
I think that will kill even more tiny images (master has been seeing a
lot of those
being disabled lately). On my TL-WR841ND v7, e.g., I have stripped some
more stuff
from master, after the 5.4 bump (which was to be expected). I was able
to squeeze
in wpad-basic again for the 802.11r (PPP removed though), but it's not
like those tiny
targets have 20 kB to spare, from what I can tell.
(I heard through the grapevine older flash/RAM constrained devices
might just stick
with kernel 4.19 btw? ath79/tiny is already on 5.4.)
Since ath79/tiny is a separate subtarget altogether, it makes sense to
offer them with
fewer features. Unless I'm mistaken we'll see a lot of
ramips/mt76{20,x8} stuff going
the same route in the near future, they have similar flash constraints.
I don't think
feature parity with more recent targets (or ones with more space) is
what one should
aim for, with a separate subtarget.
Just my 2 cents.
Stijn
P.S. Is there a way to use mbedtTLS with wpad? That would be neat since
one could have
LuCI SSL and wpad lean on the same crypto library. I am now building
images with mbedTLS
for LuCI and wolfssl for wpad; it's still smaller than having both
build with OpenSSL
but a bit cumbersome nonetheless.
Adding SAE (as all images should support WPA3-Personal from now on)
is adding
way more to the images, so excluding 802.11r doesn't make sense as
the size
difference would be probably negligible compared to the size of
wolfSSL,
certificates etc.
-- ynezz
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
