On Wednesday 10 December 2008 18:51:02 Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 06:37:23PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > Ok. I think the fundamental flaw here is assuming that there's just a > > single state. There isn't. The device can be turned off in hardware (in > > which case sw won't be able do anything about it, but we want to know) > > or in software (which we want to handle). Pretending that there's just a > > single state that's either hw-off, sw-off or on is plain wrong. The > > device can be hw-off and sw-off at the same time, and then if you turn > > off the hw-off button it won't turn on (however, unless your system > > integrator totally screwed up, you won't have a hw and a sw button on > > your system) > > They may not be physical buttons, but we can often control this anyway. But we do not _want_ it. If you can do it, keep it private to the driver. Do not export it to other layers. If you need to to sw-rfkill through it, do it in the driver and multiplex the hw-sw-states in the driver. -- Greetings, Michael. -- 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
