linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/2] rfkill sysfs ABI

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

Message-ID: <20100312191819.73ac4700@schatten.dmk.lab>
Date:	Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:18:19 +0100
From:	Florian Mickler <florian@...kler.org>
To:	"John W. Linville" <linville@...driver.com>
Cc:	"Marcel Holtmann" <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	"Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" <hmh@....eng.br>,
	"Johannes Berg" <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
	"Randy Dunlap" <rdunlap@...otime.net>,
	"Alan Jenkins" <alan-jenkins@...fmail.co.uk>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2]  rfkill sysfs ABI

On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:03:06 +0100
florian@...kler.org wrote:

> Hi all!
> 
> The first patch moves the rfkill sysfs ABI Documentation to Documentation/ABI
> and deprecates the state and claim file. 
> 
> The second patch creates a replacement for the state file. Instead of exporting
> some made-up state we just export the state of the 2 kill lines. 
> 
> The first patch should probably go into 2.6.34, as to warn users 
> (if there are any) early about this removal. 
> If there is no intent to remove the broken files, the feature-removal-schedule hunk 
> should probably be skipped. 
> 
> Cheers,
> Flo
> 
> p.s.: first discussion of this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/22/127
> 

Hi,

sorry! I just realised that you already have the blocked_sw / blocked_hw one's
queued. 

This just changes the name of blocked_sw and blocked_hw to "soft" and
"hard". 

I don't know what you wanna do. I'm fine with blocked_hw and
blocked_sw as it's referenced as such (hw/sw) in the code, but Marcel
wanted to get away from the "hard blocked by hardware" notation, as it
suggests that the transmitter could only be blocked by hardware...

cheers,
Flo
--
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/