From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail.openmoko.org ([88.198.124.205]:34434 "EHLO mail.openmoko.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752381AbZAMQLs (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jan 2009 11:11:48 -0500 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 14:11:29 -0200 From: Werner Almesberger To: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh Cc: Hans Henry von Tresckow , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: rfkill: how murderous can it be ? Message-ID: <20090113161129.GB22112@almesberger.net> (sfid-20090113_171153_465406_2EA4CBD6) References: <20090112191514.GA22112@almesberger.net> <20090113131422.GA27676@khazad-dum.debian.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <20090113131422.GA27676@khazad-dum.debian.net> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > If you kick it out of the bus (cause a full hotunplug on rfkill block, > and a hotplug when rfkill unblocks), it is userspace. > > But what if you do it halfway? That's what is being asked here... If kicking it out of the bus is okay, then that's just what I'll do. This gives us clear and familiar semantics and avoids complex and fragile state preservation in the kernel. My concern about this was whether this wouldn't take things too far. E.g., if I can safely assume that user space will be there to take care of it. >>From what I gather, it does indeed seem to be acceptable, even if it may not be ideal under all circumstances. Thanks, - Werner