[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <9b2b86520908180522o1da2c821jf803f66264424fe@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:22:33 +0100
From: Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@...glemail.com>
To: Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>, cezary.jackiewicz@...il.com,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Add rfkill support to compal-laptop
On 8/18/09, Alan Jenkins <sourcejedi.lkml@...glemail.com> wrote:
> On 8/18/09, Mario Limonciello <mario_limonciello@...l.com> wrote:
>> In order to be useful in modern kernels and standard interfaces,
>> compal-laptop should have rfkill support. This patch adds it.
>> --
>> Mario Limonciello
>> *Dell | Linux Engineering*
>> mario_limonciello@...l.com
>>
>
> I have some comments of my own as well, so here goes.
>
>> +static void compal_rfkill_query(struct rfkill *rfkill, void *data)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long radio = (unsigned long) data;
>> + u8 result;
>> + bool blocked;
>> +
>> + ec_read(COMPAL_EC_COMMAND_WIRELESS, &result);
>> +
>> + if ((result & KILLSWITCH_MASK) == 0)
>> + blocked = 1;
>
>> + else if (radio == WLAN_MASK)
>> + blocked = !(result & WLAN_MASK);
>> + else
>> + blocked = !((result & BT_MASK) >> 1);
>
> Ick, this is overdone. You should just be able to do
>
> + else
> + blocked = !(result & radio);
>
>> + rfkill_set_sw_state(rfkill,blocked);
>> + rfkill_set_hw_state(rfkill,0);
>
> This last line is redundant. The HW state will default to "unblocked"
> if you never set it.
>
>> +static int compal_rfkill_set(void *data, bool blocked)
>> +{
>> + unsigned long radio = (unsigned long) data;
>> + u8 result, value;
>> +
>> + ec_read(COMPAL_EC_COMMAND_WIRELESS, &result);
>> +
>> + if ((result & KILLSWITCH_MASK) == 0)
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + else {
>> + if (!blocked)
>> + value = (u8) (result | radio);
>> + else
>> + value = (u8) (result & ~radio);
>> + ec_write(COMPAL_EC_COMMAND_WIRELESS, value);
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>
> Note that the return value of rfkill_set is not propagated to
> userspace through the /dev/rfkill interface.
>
> The way you use "KILLSWITCH_MASK", it looks like a hard rfkill bit
> that covers all radios. Why don't you report it as a hard block on
> each rfkill device?
P.S. If you do this, you probably also want to set up polling. I
think you should be able to reuse the query() function for the poll()
method (but you should check yourself whether that makes sense).
Thanks again
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