From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com>
Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
John Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rfkill: clarify usage of rfkill_force_state() and rfkill->get_state()
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:52:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1221760328.9262.94.camel@johannes.berg> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200809181932.58272.IvDoorn@gmail.com> (sfid-20080918_193303_254045_21E4A027)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 811 bytes --]
On Thu, 2008-09-18 at 19:32 +0200, Ivo van Doorn wrote:
> Ideal situation would indeed be that mac80211 registers a rfkill structure
> and listens to rfkill events. This would help drivers by only needing to
> register a rfkill structure for state-change events without any need for
> listeners.
Yup.
> I was considering such a patch some time ago, but needed to figure out
> how to work with the state-override capabilities (HW_BLOCK and SOFT_BLOCK)
> and didn't work on it any further since.
So make the struct part of the hw structure? Then drivers can just use
that to force hard events. Or actually, no, don't do this, make a new
mac80211 call:
ieee80211_inform_hardblocked(BLOCK/OPEN)
which makes sure we can also try to not associate in this case in the
future...
johannes
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-18 17:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20080918145236.GJ1583@khazad-dum.debian.net>
2008-09-18 15:19 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-09-18 15:24 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-09-18 16:43 ` Henrique de Moraes Holschuh
2008-09-18 16:45 ` Johannes Berg
2008-09-18 17:32 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-09-18 17:52 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2008-09-18 18:12 ` Ivo van Doorn
2008-09-18 17:40 ` Ivo van Doorn
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1221760328.9262.94.camel@johannes.berg \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
--cc=hmh@hmh.eng.br \
--cc=ivdoorn@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®