On Fri, 2012-09-07 at 08:54 +0200, Vitaly Wool wrote: > Hi Henrique, > > On Fri, Sep 7, 2012 at 12:44 AM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh > <hmh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Thu, 06 Sep 2012, Vitaly Wool wrote: > > > Prevent unnecessary rfkill event generation when the state has > > > not actually changed. These events have to be delivered to > > > relevant userspace processes, causing these processes to wake > > > up and do something while they could as well have slept. This > > > obviously results in more CPU usage, longer time-to-sleep-again > > > and therefore higher power consumption. > > > > Could this supress the first event when a switch is registered? Would that > > be a concern? > > I'm not sure I got your question, but just in case, rfkill is > initialized to all zeroes so rfkill->state is 0 and on each consequent > _real_ change there (prev != curr) == true and the event will be > generated. But maybe applications were expecting an event for registration? Or do we get that anyway maybe? 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
