From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from p3plsmtpa06-01.prod.phx3.secureserver.net ([173.201.192.102]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ZepCq-0001uR-Qc for ath10k@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 23 Sep 2015 18:55:53 +0000 From: "William Riba" Subject: QCA9880/9890 rfkill Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2015 13:55:30 -0500 Message-ID: <019a01d0f631$6d01cf90$47056eb0$@wriba.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Language: en-us List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "ath10k" Errors-To: ath10k-bounces+kvalo=adurom.com@lists.infradead.org To: ath10k@lists.infradead.org Does anybody know whether rfkill in its hard block flavor is supported in any QCA9880/9890 based device and/or firmware load? While vendors refer to the WiFi disable/GPIO line in their reference schematics, it is not functional. What I see after testing multiple cards is if the line is asserted during operation, there seems to be no effect. If it is asserted at boot-up, the device does not enumerate on the PCI bus. If Qualcomm does not intend to support this functionality anymore it would be nice to know. Hard kills are a regulatory requirement for certain applications. While we would like to use a QCA9890 in a new application, there's no way it could make it through qualifications with its current operation. Any additional information on this would be welcome. Thanks. _______________________________________________ ath10k mailing list ath10k@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/ath10k