linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/8] [Resend] ideapad: using EC command to control rf/camera power

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: <4C90BE9F.5050007@canonical.com>
Date:	Wed, 15 Sep 2010 20:39:59 +0800
From:	Ike Panhc <ike.pan@...onical.com>
To:	Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe <Mario.Holbe@...Ilmenau.DE>,
	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
	"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org" 
	<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@...e.de>,
	Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Corentin Chary <corentincj@...aif.net>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	Matthew Garrett <mjg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/8] [Resend] ideapad: using EC command to control rf/camera
 power

On 09/15/2010 07:48 PM, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 06:13:43PM +0800, Ike Panhc wrote:
>> On 09/10/2010 03:11 PM, Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe wrote:
>>> 	rfkill_init_sw_state(priv->rfk[dev], 0);
>> eh.. after review the code, the rfkill_init_sw_state shall not give 0 as the default
>> value. I shall read the value from EC and set reasonable value.
> 
> Well - probably :)
> The current behaviour results in each device becoming unblocked no
> matter what state it had before.
> 
>>> 	if (no_bt_rfkill && (ideapad_rfk_data[dev].type == RFKILL_TYPE_BLUETOOTH))
>>> 		ideapad_rfk_set(???, 0);
>> Do you mean driver still setup the rfkill for bluetooth, but we can not block
>> bluetooth when module parameter set to 1? This idea is better then no_bt_rfkill.
>> Will modify the driver.
> 
> Well, not really... I mean: in the no_bt_rfkill=1 case the driver should
> (try to) unblock the bluetooth device in order to activate it to make it
> further manageable via it's own (hci) rfkill switch.
> I don't think setting up the ideapad_bluetooth rfkill is necessary for
> that. Not setting it up is IMHO the right direction. Just the device
> activation is missing.

This sounds even better, will modify the driver in this way - force enable
bluetooth and no setup rfkill for bluetooth when no_bt_rfkill.

> 
> 
> Mario

--
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/