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-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
