From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:47389 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755167AbYLJVnM (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Dec 2008 16:43:12 -0500 From: Michael Buesch To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Subject: Re: [RFC] b43: rework rfkill code Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 22:42:33 +0100 Cc: Johannes Berg , Marcel Holtmann , Matthew Garrett , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de References: <20081210150935.GA10927@srcf.ucam.org> <1228930083.15837.44.camel@johannes.berg> <20081210213334.GA7589@khazad-dum.debian.net> In-Reply-To: <20081210213334.GA7589@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200812102242.35995.mb@bu3sch.de> (sfid-20081210_224317_559890_F8AD6D74) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wednesday 10 December 2008 22:33:34 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Wed, 10 Dec 2008, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-12-10 at 18:23 +0100, 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) > > > > IOW, correct me if I'm wrong, it seems to me that user_claim_unsupported > > really is a wrong name for "has hw kill", which could be avoided if sw > > I never understood what user_claim_unsupported is for. I left it alone > because of that, but it looks like some artifact of the old rfkill that did > horrible things to the input layer. No, as I just explained. It comes from a time when we didn't have all that input stuff at all. It was a workaround. rfkill basically had a facility to change the hardware rfkill state from userspace. As b43 does not support that, I introduced the flag. Today we have three states (which is still broken, but you saw the rest of the thread...), so I guess we can remove it again. We cannot change the hardware state. That's what the flag is (was) for. -- Greetings, Michael.