From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from py-out-1112.google.com ([64.233.166.180]:37226 "EHLO py-out-1112.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752217AbYFWKCg (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Jun 2008 06:02:36 -0400 Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id p76so915168pyb.10 for ; Mon, 23 Jun 2008 03:02:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1ba2fa240806230302x11c0ed0dn6210c8fe745fdf6d@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20080623_120240_113509_E834D52D) Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 13:02:27 +0300 From: "Tomas Winkler" To: "Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" Subject: Re: Rfkill on ifconfig up. Cc: "Linux Wireless" , "Dan Williams" , "Abbas, Mohamed" In-Reply-To: <20080623050514.GA9926@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <1ba2fa240806221609p1b0cd641g2304d0812b61ecb3@mail.gmail.com> <20080623050514.GA9926@khazad-dum.debian.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Tomas Winkler wrote: >> Little RF KILL design question from user space perspective. >> What should be desired return value of ifconfig up when HW rfkill is >> on (radio is off). > > This isn't really about rfkill, its design doesn't call for any particular > behaviour. IMHO we should go with the principle of least suprise, and also > more convenience for the user. No, this is about ifconfig up > In the end, it will depend on the capabilities of the hardware, I suppose. > Assuming the hardware CAN bring its interface up without going bonkers > because the transmitter is not transmitting anything, that's exactly what it > should do IMO. > > What it must never do is to unblock the transmiter because of a ifconfig up > :-) > >> rfkill on (radio off) >> ifconfig wlan0 up >> rfkill off (radio on) >> >> Will it be ok for these sequence to require additional ifconfig up to >> make driver to work, providing the first ifconfig up failed? > > It would be nice if it didn't fail the first ifconfig, and therefore needed > nothing special to work other than a rfkill unblock. Everything is doable just 'would be nice' is not good reason enough :) Thanks anyway Tomas