[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1266746855.18491.0.camel@violet>
Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 11:07:35 +0100
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>,
Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] enhance /sys/class/rfkill/<rfkill>/state interface
Hi Florian,
> > > Introduce a new state-value RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_AND_HARD_BLOCKED
> > > which is returned only through the sysfs state file.
> > > The other interfaces are designed so that they don't need this extra
> > > state.
> > >
> > > This allows the sysfs to represent all possible states an rfkill
> > > driver can
> > > have.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > After stumbling over this arbitrary limitation of
> > > sys/class/rfkill/*/state I
> > > wondered what would hinder this patch?
> >
> > This is not backward compatible, so can't be done.
> >
> > johannes
>
> hmm... ah, i see... if driver is in hard'n'soft-block state
> an userspace program would expect to read hardblock instead of the
> new hard'n'softblock-state...
> now that i think of it, it even becomes obvious :)
a userspace program would be expected to use /dev/rfkill and do this
properly. Don't bother with sysfs at all.
Regards
Marcel
--
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