On Thursday 18 September 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > On Thursday 18 September 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008, Ivo van Doorn wrote: > > > > This depends on the hardware, for b43 the toggle() callback might not be needed, > > > > but for rt2x00 it does (Since the key press will only raise a GPIO bit and does not > > > > affect the radio in any way). > > > > > > Hmm... please correct me if I misunderstood, but wouldn't that mean that > > > rt2x00 does not have a hardware rfkill line at all, and that instead it has > > > a GPIO pin that is used to communicate the desire to software-rfkill the > > > transmitter... and the driver needs to do everything. > > > > That is correct. > > Yeah, thanks <deity> I noticed this post :-) That will make it MUCH easier > for me to sync with you and actually grok what you are saying. Hehe :) > > > And if you don't emulate HARD_BLOCKED, you have to handle the input device > > > inside the rt2x00 driver, because the world outside (and that includes the > > > rfkill core and everything else) sure as heck won't know if you SOFT_BLOCKED > > > because of that GPIO pin, or because of something else. > > > > Currently rt2x00 polls the GPIO pin every second (no interrupts are raised when the > > GPIO pin is toggled) and uses rfkill_force_state(SOFT_BLOCK/UNBLOCK) to rfkill > > I just sent a post about it. If you get a bit that tells you HW RFKILL > ACTIVE/INACTIVE (as opposed to "please toggle it"), you don't need to care > about whatever else is reading that thing. You can always register an input > device, and issue EV_SW SW_WLAN or EV_SW SW_RFKILL_ALL (I'd sugest making it > configurable). But do NOT issue EV_KEY, THAT one breaks if anything else is > also listening to that input signal. Ok. Ivo -- 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
