linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rfkill: Regulator consumer driver for rfkill

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <4D9D0A45020000230002AEF7@novprvlin0050.provo.novell.com>
Date:	Wed, 06 Apr 2011 08:50:13 -0600
From:	"Joey Lee" <jlee@...ell.com>
To:	<ospite@...denti.unina.it>
Cc:	<gmzhuo@...il.com>, <marek.vasut@...il.com>,
	<openezx-devel@...ts.openezx.org>,
	<broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>, <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	<lrg@...mlogic.co.uk>, <linville@...driver.com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rfkill: Regulator consumer driver for rfkill

Hi Antonio, 

於 三，2011-04-06 於 16:24 +0200，Antonio Ospite 提到：
> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:09:28 +0200
> Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 16:06 +0200, Antonio Ospite wrote:
> > 
> > > > > +	if (regulator_is_enabled(vcc)) {
> > > > > +		dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Regulator already enabled\n");
> > > > > +		rfkill_data->reg_enabled = 1;
> > > > > +	}
> > > > > +	rfkill_init_sw_state(rf_kill, !rfkill_data->reg_enabled);
> > > > > +
> > > > > +	ret = rfkill_register(rf_kill);
> > > > 
> > > > We recently had a thread about how rfkill_init_sw_state() isn't quite
> > > > working the right way. Also, it is indented to be used for devices that
> > > > keep their state over resume. I think you should remove it here and rely
> > > > on rfkill to sync you after registration.
> > > > 
> > > > Cf. the long thread here:
> > > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.acpi.devel/49577
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Ok, but I still need to replace that call with a rfkill_set_sw_state()
> > > to expose the initial status of the regulator to the rfkill system,
> > > right?
> > 
> > Well, you could, but if you don't do that then the rfkill subsystem will
> > simply call set_block() shortly after registration to put it into the
> > state that it thinks it should be in, which is usually more useful.
> > 
> 
> I see, let's just drop rfkill_init_sw_state() then.
> 
> Regards,
>    Antonio
> 

Like Johannes's comment, the rfkill_init_sw_state is a bit tricky
especially when RFKILL_INPUT enabled. The rfkill_init_sw_state will
replicate the state to device global state, then rfkill will replicate
it to other killswitch.

If you want to use rfkill_init_sw_state to set rfkill initial state when
driver probed, then I suggest you need test it when:
	- RFKILL_INPUT enabled
	and
	- when device initial state is disabled(BLOCKED)

If you want to maintain the rfkill initial state by your self, you can
reference this patch:
http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/mjg59/platform-drivers-x86.git;a=commitdiff;h=8215af019040ce9182728afee9642d8fdeb17f59

The patch set intial state by rfkill_set_sw_state after rfkill register,
and don't touch the BIOS (firmware?) state in set_block until driver
probe finished.


Thank's a lot!
Joey Lee

--
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/