Re: [RFC] rfkill: rewrite

[Inaky Perez-Gonzalez <inaky@linux.intel.com>]

On Monday 30 March 2009, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-03-30 at 19:54 +0200, Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> > > > wimax_report_rfkill_hw() -- device driver report to stack
> > > >
> > > >    device reports a change in the hw rfkill key; switch the radio to
> > > >    whichever state AND report a key event through the input layer
> > >
> > > But reporting the key through the input layer is wrong, afaict.
> >
> > Why because it combines it with switching the radio?
> > In rt2x00 all key events are going through the input layer as well,
> > because it has no influence on the radio state of the device.
> > (In other words, you can still happily send and receive all
> > the data you want regardless of the key state).
>
> Yes, but my understanding is (and I've just rewritten the code, heh)
> that if the button switches the hardware kill directly then we don't
> report an input event.
>
> Except in very limited circumstances (like the thinkpad-acpi platform
> driver Henrique explained) I think doing _both_
> rfkill_force_state(hard-blocked) [in new API terms:
> rfkill_set_hw_block(true)] _and_ input_report() is incorrect.

I guess there is both history to both; Johannes, you are right, in this
case the hw rfkill kills the radio in HW and *we* send the input event.

Reason it sends the input event is because I used the rt2x00 code as
reference...

So, if you guys all agree that passing this to the input layer is not
needed,feel free to yank it.

-- 
Inaky