On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:07 AM, Tomas Winkler <tomasw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 19, 2008 at 12:06 AM, Chatre, Reinette > > <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 18, 2008 2:47 PM, drago01 wrote: > > > > >> Please note that the driver loads/unloads the firmware during > > >> interface up/down. That means that the host will not receive rfkill > > >> events while the interface is down as there is no firmware to deal > > >> with these events. > > >> > > >> Reinette > > >> > > > > > > OK that makes sense. > > > So a solution would be to not unload the firmware on down when the hw > > > rfkill is on. Is this a acceptable one or are they other (better > > > solutions). I can't think of any. And userspace cannot do anything > > > because bringing the device up and down again to look for the rfkill > > > status would be racy. > > > > Having the firmware unloaded when the interface is down is a requirement > > for powersaving. We do not want the device to consume power when it is > > not used. The rfkill status should always be reported accurately when > > the interface is up. If it is not then it is a bug. > > We will catch the HW rfkill event after loading the uCode so there is > no problem with this. > Not sure where should be the SW rfkill state stored. yeah, but the ucode will be loaded when the device is brought back up, which does not happen in NM's case. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
