From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from bu3sch.de ([62.75.166.246]:47248 "EHLO vs166246.vserver.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754613AbYIRRe2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:34:28 -0400 From: Michael Buesch To: Larry Finger Subject: Re: [RFC] b43: A patch for control of the radio LED using rfkill Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:34:02 +0200 Cc: Ivo van Doorn , John W Linville , bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <48d1e227.AmBwRnEuhx6kxlHv%Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> <200809181519.12366.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <48D25BFE.6020708@lwfinger.net> In-Reply-To: <48D25BFE.6020708@lwfinger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200809181934.03026.mb@bu3sch.de> (sfid-20080918_193440_877952_05E5DF69) Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 18 September 2008 15:47:42 Larry Finger wrote: > Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > > Is dev->phy.radio_on set when mac80211 has send an instruction > > to the driver to enable the radio (start() or config() callback) > > or does it represent the key state in the hardware? > > > > If it is something coming from mac80211, then you do not want > > to send a SOFT_BLOCKED event since that will cause all other radios > > to be switched off simply because the b43 interface has not been > > enabled. > > > > Off course when it represents the key state in the hardware then the > > code would be fine... > > The state comes from mac80211 and is set in the config() callback. > > What state should be sent at the point when the hardware block is > removed? It seems to me that forcing an UNBLOCKED state gives the > wrong result. Perhaps RFKILL does need to have 4 states so that an > RFKILL_STATE_HW_UNBLOCKED state can be transmitted. If sw is unblocked, but hw is still blocked, you must not announce unblocked state to rfkill. -- Greetings Michael.