From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:60539 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752540AbZAMAyG (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jan 2009 19:54:06 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 00:54:01 +0000 From: Matthew Garrett To: Werner Almesberger Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: rfkill: how murderous can it be ? Message-ID: <20090113005401.GA7565@srcf.ucam.org> (sfid-20090113_015417_327650_2850A9C3) References: <20090112191514.GA22112@almesberger.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20090112191514.GA22112@almesberger.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 05:15:14PM -0200, Werner Almesberger wrote: > Alternatively, we could just power down the whole WLAN module. That is > easily done and very reliable. However, MAC state (ESSID, keys, and a > host of other settings) is obliterated if we do this. A watchful user > space (e.g., wpa_supplicant) could then restore the status quo ante. Some platform rfkill methods will perform a logical PCI hotplug of the device, without any means of notifying the driver beforehand. Since this will destroy the driver structure, I think we really need to leave state restoration up to userspace. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org