On Mon, 23 Jun 2008, Tomas Winkler wrote: > Little RF KILL design question from user space perspective. > What should be desired return value of ifconfig up when HW rfkill is > on (radio is off). This isn't really about rfkill, its design doesn't call for any particular behaviour. IMHO we should go with the principle of least suprise, and also more convenience for the user. In the end, it will depend on the capabilities of the hardware, I suppose. Assuming the hardware CAN bring its interface up without going bonkers because the transmitter is not transmitting anything, that's exactly what it should do IMO. What it must never do is to unblock the transmiter because of a ifconfig up :-) > rfkill on (radio off) > ifconfig wlan0 up > rfkill off (radio on) > > Will it be ok for these sequence to require additional ifconfig up to > make driver to work, providing the first ifconfig up failed? It would be nice if it didn't fail the first ifconfig, and therefore needed nothing special to work other than a rfkill unblock. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh -- 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
