On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 5:31 PM, Matthew Garrett <mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 05:27:38PM +0100, drago01 wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:15 PM, John W. Linville >> <linville@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> > So I keep looking at these patches, and I'm not sure about them. >> > It seems that they restore the rfkill state after resume to what it >> > was before the suspend. >> >> Wouldn't this break hw kill switches? >> If I move the switch while the system is suspended it will ignore this >> event but the hw will still not work. > > Whichever driver is responsible for listening to the hardware events > should handle that in its own resume method. The rfkill state > restoration code will only be relevant for restoring state set by > sofware. > >> Well the above scenario would be just broken. >> Unless the driver rereads the real hw state and updates the rfkill >> state on resume. > > Quite. How else are you going to know if a switch has moved in the > intervening time? Yeah that makes sense, please ignore my comment ;) -- 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
