From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de,
hmh@hmh.eng.br
Subject: Re: [RFC] b43: rework rfkill code
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:31:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200812101831.13526.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1228929820.15837.40.camel@johannes.berg>
On Wednesday 10 December 2008 18:23:40 Johannes Berg wrote:
> Then there's user_claim_unsupported which is set by all drivers but
> rt2x00, probably because they have hardware kill switches and thus they
> have to set it even if it's not strictly true, because of the lacking
> separation between these things (that I pointed out)
I introduced it when I ported b43 to rfkill.
Well, a lot of semantical changes were made _after_ that.
When I added it there only were two rfkill states and b43 handled these wrt the
actual hardware state (and I still think that's the right thing to do. The sw-state intermix
is confusing).
So when I added the flag it meant:
user_claim_unsupported = True means user cannot change the hardware kill state.
So basically it means the device has two states. One software state and one hardware
state.
However, I don't know what the semantics for the flag are today. Lots of code changed.
--
Greetings, Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-10 15:09 [RFC] b43: rework rfkill code Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 15:29 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 16:15 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-12-10 16:51 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-12-10 17:18 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:23 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:28 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 21:33 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-12-10 21:42 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 17:31 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2008-12-10 17:37 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:51 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 18:04 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 18:05 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 18:09 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 18:29 ` Dan Williams
2008-12-10 18:33 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 18:59 ` Dan Williams
2008-12-10 20:07 ` Michael Buesch
2009-03-29 18:19 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-11 0:32 ` Julian Calaby
2008-12-11 1:27 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-11 13:28 ` Kalle Valo
2008-12-10 15:48 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 16:12 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-11 16:55 ` Larry Finger
2008-12-12 4:28 ` Larry Finger
2008-12-17 15:48 ` John W. Linville
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200812101831.13526.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.