Hi João, On Tue, Feb 9, 2016 at 2:41 AM, João Paulo Rechi Vita <jprvita@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Provide an interface for the airplane-mode indicator be controlled from > userspace. User has to first acquire the control through > RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_ACQUIRE and keep the fd open for the whole time > it wants to be in control of the indicator. Closing the fd or using > RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_RELEASE restores the default policy. > > To change state of the indicator, the RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_CHANGE > operation is used, passing the value on "struct rfkill_event.soft". If > the caller has not acquired the airplane-mode control beforehand, the > operation fails. > > Signed-off-by: João Paulo Rechi Vita <jprvita@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/rfkill.txt | 10 ++++++++++ > include/uapi/linux/rfkill.h | 3 +++ > net/rfkill/core.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 3 files changed, 57 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/rfkill/core.c b/net/rfkill/core.c > index fb11547..8067701 100644 > --- a/net/rfkill/core.c > +++ b/net/rfkill/core.c > @@ -1207,6 +1210,34 @@ static ssize_t rfkill_fop_write(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, > > mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex); > > + if (ev.op == RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_ACQUIRE) { > + if (rfkill_apm_owned && !data->is_apm_owner) { > + count = -EACCES; > + } else { > + rfkill_apm_owned = true; > + data->is_apm_owner = true; > + } > + } > + > + if (ev.op == RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_RELEASE) { > + if (rfkill_apm_owned && !data->is_apm_owner) { Are you sure this is correct? In the case that airplane mode isn't owned, the rfkill_apm_led_trigger_event() call will be a noop, so we should arguably not be calling it. Also, should we just fail silently if we're not the owner? I.e. what does userspace learn from this op failing and is that useful? > + count = -EACCES; > + } else { > + bool state = rfkill_global_states[RFKILL_TYPE_ALL].cur; > + > + rfkill_apm_owned = false; > + data->is_apm_owner = false; > + rfkill_apm_led_trigger_event(state); > + } > + } > + > + if (ev.op == RFKILL_OP_AIRPLANE_MODE_CHANGE) { > + if (rfkill_apm_owned && data->is_apm_owner) > + rfkill_apm_led_trigger_event(ev.soft); > + else > + count = -EACCES; > + } > + > if (ev.op == RFKILL_OP_CHANGE_ALL) > rfkill_update_global_state(ev.type, ev.soft); > > @@ -1230,7 +1261,17 @@ static int rfkill_fop_release(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) > struct rfkill_int_event *ev, *tmp; > > mutex_lock(&rfkill_global_mutex); > + > + if (data->is_apm_owner) { > + bool state = rfkill_global_states[RFKILL_TYPE_ALL].cur; > + > + rfkill_apm_owned = false; > + data->is_apm_owner = false; > + rfkill_apm_led_trigger_event(state); Also, this code is duplicated from the _RELEASE op above. Would it make sense to factor it out into a separate function? > + } > + > list_del(&data->list); > + (extra line) > mutex_unlock(&rfkill_global_mutex); > > mutex_destroy(&data->mtx); Thanks, -- Julian Calaby Email: julian.calaby@xxxxxxxxx Profile: http://www.google.com/profiles/julian.calaby/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html