From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.185]:61777 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755134AbYIRUlG (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Sep 2008 16:41:06 -0400 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d3so46557nfc.21 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:41:04 -0700 (PDT) To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Subject: Re: [RFC] b43: A patch for control of the radio LED using rfkill Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 22:41:00 +0200 Cc: Johannes Berg , Michael Buesch , Larry Finger , John W Linville , bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de, linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org References: <48d1e227.AmBwRnEuhx6kxlHv%Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net> <200809182006.58620.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20080918201004.GR1583@khazad-dum.debian.net> In-Reply-To: <20080918201004.GR1583@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Message-Id: <200809182241.00906.IvDoorn@gmail.com> (sfid-20080918_224115_709504_06B01314) From: Ivo van Doorn Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thursday 18 September 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 19:52 +0200, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > > > From rfkill.h: > > > > RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_BLOCKED = 0, /* Radio output blocked */ > > > > RFKILL_STATE_UNBLOCKED = 1, /* Radio output allowed */ > > > > RFKILL_STATE_HARD_BLOCKED = 2, /* Output blocked, non-overrideable */ > > > > > > > > Since b43 has a rfkill mechanism that does switch of the radio when RFKILL is set to BLOCK > > > > after a key press, it should send RFKILL_STATE_HARD_BLOCKED because rfkill cannot override > > > > it. > > > > > > > > rt2x00 hardware does not change the radio state when RFKILL is set to BLOCK after a key press, > > > > the state is therefor overridable and it can send RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_BLOCKED to rfkill. > > > > > > If rt2x00 has no meaning of "hardware blocked", why is the button not a > > > simple input device? > > > > Because I had that discussion with Henrique and that ended with a "it isn't a input device"... > > Because I NEVER UNDERSTOOD it was not a hardware rfkill line until a few > posts ago in this thread. Argh. My deepest apologies for that screw up. > > Now that I do, my answer is "depends on how the platform used that input pin". > > If it is directly connected to a switch (you get on/off from it) or a button > (you get "I have been pressed, please toggle the state"), it is an input > device. [a] > > If it is directly connected to some crap inside the platform, that is > controlled by firmware, it is NOT an input device. [b] Ok, rt2x00 is definately [a] > I hope it is a switch, and that you can just always provide an input device > that issues some sort of EV_SW event (if you need it, we ask Dmitry to add > EV_SW SW_WLAN). Ok, I'll readd the input_polldev to rt2x00 again then. :) Ivo