On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 12:49 -0700, wwguy wrote: > On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 12:44 -0700, Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 12:37 -0700, wwguy wrote: > > > > > > So if you want "solid on" by default for 0 tpt, you simply don't specify > > > > the -1 value, ie. just remove the -1 line from the table completely. > > > > IOW, instead of the patch you posted before, a simple patch just > > > > removing the first line from the table should be sufficient. > > > > > > > > > Yes, I agree as today, "on" == "off", just thinking we should make more > > > > > flexible. > > > > > > > > I just don't see the point since we don't really need it. > > > > > > Just thinking give more control to the driver, but it is ok don't have > > > it > > > > I wouldn't really mind, I just don't think it's useful before some > > driver actually needs it, and all the current ones want symmetric > > blinking (and also I think asymmetric would look odd). > > > well, if you think it is ok, then I will submit it, or I will just drop > it. I'd prefer not having it until we need it for some driver. johannes -- 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
