lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 9 Jul 2008 22:12:01 -0300
From:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <>
To:	Ivo van Doorn <>
Cc:	Cezary Jackiewicz <>,,,, Len Brown <>,
	Richard Purdie <>,
	Andrew Morton <>
Subject: Re: [RESEND] [PATCH -next 2/2] acpi,rfkill,backlight:
	comapl-laptop update - use rfkill switch subsystem

On Wed, 09 Jul 2008, Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> It is not mandatory if you are writing rfkill support for a driver that does not
> come with a rfkill switch. Such drivers can make use of the rfkill events produced
> by the hardware which does have such a switch.
> When the hardware does have the rfkill switch, then yes rfkill_force_state() is mandatory.
> The get_state() callback function is optional, and allows rfkill to differentiate
> between soft and hardblock.

Do you want me to mark rfkill_force_state() as mandatory in the docs?  It
*IS* the preferred way to deal with firmware/hardware-initiated state
changes, after all.

The rfkill subsystem will limp along without it, even when there are
hardware rfkill lines... but no OSD function will work, as the system will
pick up the change only when someone reads or writes to the state

  "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
  them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
  where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
  Henrique Holschuh
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists