On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 2:34 PM, Justin P. Mattock
<justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/26/2010 02:05 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:38 AM, Justin P. Mattock
>> <justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On 05/26/2010 10:18 AM, John W. Linville wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 10:14:16AM -0700, Justin P. Mattock wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Disable the leds on ath9k for Apple products, since
>>>>> there is no leds on any of there machines(or non that I can find!!).
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Justin P. Mattock<justinmattock@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>
>>
>> Our team has confirmed Apple devices do not have LEDs so a change like
>> this is OK but this patch is wrong anyway. More details below.
>>
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> void ath_init_leds(struct ath_softc *sc)
>>>>> {
>>>>> char *trigger;
>>>>> int ret;
>>>>>
>>>>> + /* Apple has no leds lights for their wireless. */
>>>>> + if (dmi_check_system(dmi_system_table)> 0)
>>>>> + return -ENODEV;
>>>>> + else
>>>>> +
>>>>> if (AR_SREV_9287(sc->sc_ah))
>>>>> sc->sc_ah->led_pin = ATH_LED_PIN_9287;
>>>>> else
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Surely we don't need the 'else'.
>>>>
>>>> Does enabling the LEDs on these systems cause any problems?
>>>>
>>>> John
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I picked up the idea, from this patch:
>>> http://kerneltrap.org/mailarchive/linux-kernel/2010/1/20/4530535
>>> while looking into a bug for ath9k(thinking maybe leds
>>> are causing something, which want the case)
>>>
>>> so Id have to say I don't think the leds cause issue's,
>>> if anything just a wasted symlink, call, or whatever
>>> in /sys/class/leds/*
>>>
>>
>> The patch is wrong anyway, ath_init_leds() is void and yet you return
>> a value. If this is really needed I'd also prefer if you define a bool
>> or something and use a ah->ignore_leds and set this to true if the DMI
>> stuff checks out for Apple up hw init. Then check for ignore_leds
>> prior to calling ath_init_leds() and also avoid it if set. Also check
>> for ingore_leds upon device cleanup and ignore the
>> acancel_delayed_work_sync(&sc->ath_led_blink_work) and
>> ath_deinit_leds() and skip that.
>>
>> But given that it is not needed it seems a lot of work for something
>> that is a non-issue.
>>
>> Luis
>>
>>
>
> tough to say!! I was looking into a bug a few months back, and
> thought hmm.. maybe something is being called with the leds
> but the leds are not there causing some thing to crap out..
>
> so out of curiosity I remembered the dmi disable patch, and
> semi somewhat pieced it together(just to see the results of disabling the
> leds).
> unfortunately still hit the strange thing with wpa_supplicant and ath9k(the
> disconnect thing).
>
> as for the above procedure(I can give that a try.. but it might
> take a while...)
OK thanks for the details, best just ignore it unless you can prove it
fixes an issue.
Luis
--
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
