On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:14:48 +0100 Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 22:40 +0100, florian@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Introduce a new state-value RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_AND_HARD_BLOCKED > > which is returned only through the sysfs state file. > > The other interfaces are designed so that they don't need this extra > > state. > > > > This allows the sysfs to represent all possible states an rfkill > > driver can > > have. > > > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > > > After stumbling over this arbitrary limitation of > > sys/class/rfkill/*/state I > > wondered what would hinder this patch? > > This is not backward compatible, so can't be done. > > johannes hmm... ah, i see... if driver is in hard'n'soft-block state an userspace program would expect to read hardblock instead of the new hard'n'softblock-state... now that i think of it, it even becomes obvious :) cheers, Flo -- 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
