linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] toshiba_acpi: Add support for bluetooth toggling through rfkill

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200807282232.38076.IvDoorn@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Jul 2008 22:32:37 +0200
From:	Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@...il.com>
To:	Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@....eng.br>
Cc:	Dan Williams <dcbw@...hat.com>,
	Philip Langdale <philipl@...rt.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
	toshiba_acpi@...ebeam.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] toshiba_acpi: Add support for bluetooth toggling through rfkill

On Monday 28 July 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Jul 2008, Dan Williams wrote:
> > On Mon, 2008-07-28 at 00:04 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > On Sun, 27 Jul 2008, Philip Langdale wrote:
> > > > Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> > > >> You don't seem to be using rfkill_force_state() which is required to inform the rfkill
> > > >> layer about the state changes.
> > > >
> > > > Hmm? According to rfkill.txt, one can either use force_state() or implement the
> > > > get_state() hook, and I have done the later. If this is not the correct method,
> > > > can you please explain when I should be using force_state?
> > > 
> > > There is a bunch of rfkill bug fix patches that was not merged in
> > > wireless-testing yet (which is a pity, it would be really good if they could
> > > go into 2.6.27).  One of those patches fixes the docs to make it clear that
> > 
> > Lots of wireless people (including John) were at OLS this past week, so
> > it's not entirely surprising that patch merging might have been slow.
> 
> That would explain it, yes...  Well, I sure hope this means the patches
> still have a non-zero chance of being sent to mainline for 2.6.27 :-)  I am
> not up to date on how merges are usually handled in the wireless and net
> subsystems.

The feature window for 2.6.27 closed with the release of 2.6.26, after that
only bugfixes can go in.

Ivo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/