wpa_supplicant: Use PF_LOCAL instead of PF_INET*

[cy]

Summary

Using a local socket circumvents the issue of needing any Internet
protocol (PF_INET or PF_INET6) support.
We only use interface ("i" group) ioctls on this socket so we can get
away with using PF_LOCAL instead of requring any Internet protocol
(PF_INET or PF_INET6) support on the system. This simplifies the
patch from 8c7149c73f8f.

Noted by: kevans
Fixes: 8c7149c73f8f
MFC after: 1 month

Test Plan

Running here.

[philip]

I haven't tested this but assuming we do indeed use only interface ioctls, this looks like it should work.

[cy]

In D50050#1141351, @philip wrote:

I haven't tested this but assuming we do indeed use only interface ioctls, this looks like it should work.

Yeah. kevans@ remarked about this on src-committers after I had pushed D49959. I tested it here. It works on my Framework laptop. It's now being installed on the HP 840. I expect it to work there as it did on the Framework.

[zarychtam_plan-b.pwste.edu.pl]

Since it was code in contrib, I didn't want to change it much; I just used a simple duct-tape fix. Indeed, PF_LOCAL works fine here as well, and it's likely the right fix.

[bz]

In D50050#1141439, @zarychtam_plan-b.pwste.edu.pl wrote:

Since it was code in contrib, I didn't want to change it much; I just used a simple duct-tape fix. Indeed, PF_LOCAL works fine here as well, and it's likely the right fix.

Does it work on NetBSD? Otherwise we'll have merge conflicts with upstream or need to #ifdef this out.

[roy_marples.name]

In D50050#1141446, @bz wrote:

In D50050#1141439, @zarychtam_plan-b.pwste.edu.pl wrote:

Since it was code in contrib, I didn't want to change it much; I just used a simple duct-tape fix. Indeed, PF_LOCAL works fine here as well, and it's likely the right fix.

Does it work on NetBSD? Otherwise we'll have merge conflicts with upstream or need to #ifdef this out.

Works fine. Ship it.

[cy]

In D50050#1141447, @roy_marples.name wrote:

In D50050#1141446, @bz wrote:

In D50050#1141439, @zarychtam_plan-b.pwste.edu.pl wrote:

Since it was code in contrib, I didn't want to change it much; I just used a simple duct-tape fix. Indeed, PF_LOCAL works fine here as well, and it's likely the right fix.

Does it work on NetBSD? Otherwise we'll have merge conflicts with upstream or need to #ifdef this out.

Works fine. Ship it.

I'll create a pull request for upstream today.

[cy]

Initial tests on my Framework using rtwn(4), passed. Now running it on my HP 840 G5 with iwm(4) and Acer 4752 with iwn(4).

I'll push this out this afternoon and apply the patch to the ports as well. Then cobble a pull request for upstream.