From: Dan Williams <dcbw@redhat.com>
To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] rfkill: add support for wake-on-wireless-packet
Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:42:45 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1217864565.3139.17.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080802192704.GB24253@khazad-dum.debian.net>
On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 16:27 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> Hi Johannes!
>
> On Sat, 02 Aug 2008, Johannes Berg wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2008-08-02 at 15:11 -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > > Currently, rfkill would stand in the way of properly supporting wireless
> > > devices that are capable of waking the system up from sleep or hibernation
> > > when they receive a special wireless message.
> > >
> > > Since rfkill attempts to soft-block any transmitters during class suspend,
> >
> > why does it interfere with suspend anyway?
>
> The class makes sure that all transmitters are blocked on suspend. You'd
> have to ask Ivo for the reason, but AFAIK, it is for both safety and to help
> conserve power.
rfkill shouldn't be touching stuff during suspend.
In the OLPC libertas case, the radio may remain _ON_ during suspend,
because the OLPC machines are expected to suspend/resume many times per
second, and the radio must continue to participate in the mesh during
that time. The only case where the radio gets blocked is when the user
requests it or when regulations require it.
Suspend != block, and tying suspend and rfkill together really is a
policy decision. Thus, I don't agree that rfkill should block radios on
suspend.
Dan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-08-04 15:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-08-02 18:10 [GIT PATCH] rfkill changes for 2.6.28, set 1 Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-02 18:10 ` [PATCH 1/8] rfkill: detect bogus double-registering (v2) Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:04 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-02 18:10 ` [PATCH 2/8] rfkill: add default global states (v2) Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:05 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-02 18:10 ` [PATCH 3/8] rfkill: add __must_check annotations Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:05 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 4/8] rfkill: introduce RFKILL_STATE_MAX Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:06 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 5/8] rfkill: add WARN_ON and BUG_ON paranoia Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:07 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 8:57 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-03 10:07 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 13:28 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 13:53 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 13:36 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 13:21 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 13:50 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 18:12 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 6/8] rfkill: use the new WARN() Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:10 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 13:32 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 7/8] rfkill: rename rfkill_mutex to rfkill_global_mutex Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-02 18:11 ` [PATCH 8/8] rfkill: add support for wake-on-wireless-packet Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-02 19:02 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-02 19:27 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-02 21:21 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-03 3:55 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 6:03 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-03 13:52 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 15:49 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-03 18:25 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 22:36 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-04 2:52 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 8:12 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-08-03 8:07 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-03 13:44 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-03 14:12 ` Tomas Winkler
2008-08-04 15:42 ` Dan Williams [this message]
2008-08-04 22:30 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-04 22:56 ` Dan Williams
2008-08-04 23:35 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-05 9:12 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-05 12:48 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-05 12:50 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-05 12:59 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-05 20:44 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-08-05 20:54 ` Johannes Berg
2008-08-05 13:03 ` Dan Williams
2008-08-05 14:00 ` John W. Linville
2008-08-05 18:37 ` Ivo van Doorn
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=1217864565.3139.17.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=dcbw@redhat.com \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=ivdoorn@gmail.com \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox