On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 16:09:28 +0200
Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 16:06 +0200, Antonio Ospite wrote:
>
> > > > + if (regulator_is_enabled(vcc)) {
> > > > + dev_dbg(&pdev->dev, "Regulator already enabled\n");
> > > > + rfkill_data->reg_enabled = 1;
> > > > + }
> > > > + rfkill_init_sw_state(rf_kill, !rfkill_data->reg_enabled);
> > > > +
> > > > + ret = rfkill_register(rf_kill);
> > >
> > > We recently had a thread about how rfkill_init_sw_state() isn't quite
> > > working the right way. Also, it is indented to be used for devices that
> > > keep their state over resume. I think you should remove it here and rely
> > > on rfkill to sync you after registration.
> > >
> > > Cf. the long thread here:
> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.acpi.devel/49577
> > >
> >
> > Ok, but I still need to replace that call with a rfkill_set_sw_state()
> > to expose the initial status of the regulator to the rfkill system,
> > right?
>
> Well, you could, but if you don't do that then the rfkill subsystem will
> simply call set_block() shortly after registration to put it into the
> state that it thinks it should be in, which is usually more useful.
>
I see, let's just drop rfkill_init_sw_state() then.
Regards,
Antonio
--
Antonio Ospite
http://ao2.it
PGP public key ID: 0x4553B001
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Attachment:
pgpNuVKgljehZ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
