[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <490B4014.4040009@tuffmail.co.uk>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:27:48 +0000
From: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>
To: Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>
CC: linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux acpi <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: eeepc-laptop rfkill, stupid question #4 and 5
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 05:09:09PM +0000, Alan Jenkins wrote:
>
>> Did you miss a call to rfkill_force_state() on resume?
>>
>
> Conceivably. I didn't test the hibernation case.
>
>
>> Actually, normal boot doesn't preserve the setting either. Your commit
>> changes the behaviour from the rfkill state being persistent across
>> reboot / power off (as a bios setting), to being always enabled on
>> boot. It seems like a bad idea to me.
>>
>
> This is the behaviour of the rfkill core.
>
Documentation/rfkill.txt implied otherwise
You should:
- rfkill_allocate()
- modify rfkill fields (flags, name)
- modify state to the current hardware state (THIS IS THE ONLY TIME
YOU CAN ACCESS state DIRECTLY)
- rfkill_register()
Admittedly it doesn't say "and I promise not to gratuitously override
the state on registration". Buti t seems weird though, to override the
value on registration instead of just setting a default in
rfkill_allocate().
Thanks
Alan
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists