From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>,
Matthew Garrett <mjg59@srcf.ucam.org>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de,
hmh@hmh.eng.br
Subject: Re: [RFC] b43: rework rfkill code
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:31:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200812101831.13526.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1228929820.15837.40.camel@johannes.berg>
On Wednesday 10 December 2008 18:23:40 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)
I introduced it when I ported b43 to rfkill.
Well, a lot of semantical changes were made _after_ that.
When I added it there only were two rfkill states and b43 handled these wrt the
actual hardware state (and I still think that's the right thing to do. The sw-state intermix
is confusing).
So when I added the flag it meant:
user_claim_unsupported = True means user cannot change the hardware kill state.
So basically it means the device has two states. One software state and one hardware
state.
However, I don't know what the semantics for the flag are today. Lots of code changed.
--
Greetings, Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-12-10 17:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-12-10 15:09 [RFC] b43: rework rfkill code Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 15:29 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 16:15 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-12-10 16:51 ` Marcel Holtmann
2008-12-10 17:18 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:23 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:28 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 21:33 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-12-10 21:42 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 17:31 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2008-12-10 17:37 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 17:51 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 18:04 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 18:05 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 18:09 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-10 18:29 ` Dan Williams
2008-12-10 18:33 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-10 18:59 ` Dan Williams
2008-12-10 20:07 ` Michael Buesch
2009-03-29 18:19 ` Johannes Berg
2008-12-11 0:32 ` Julian Calaby
2008-12-11 1:27 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-11 13:28 ` Kalle Valo
2008-12-10 15:48 ` Michael Buesch
2008-12-10 16:12 ` Matthew Garrett
2008-12-11 16:55 ` Larry Finger
2008-12-12 4:28 ` Larry Finger
2008-12-17 15:48 ` John W. Linville
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=200812101831.13526.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=bcm43xx-dev@lists.berlios.de \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=mjg59@srcf.ucam.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).