enhance /sys/class/rfkill/<rfkill>/state interface
in [Kernel]
|
Prev: Rename kernel's magic sections for compatibility with -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections
Next: [Patch 0/3] backlight
From: Johannes Berg on 20 Feb 2010 17:20 On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 22:40 +0100, florian(a)mickler.org wrote: > Introduce a new state-value RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_AND_HARD_BLOCKED > which is returned only through the sysfs state file. > The other interfaces are designed so that they don't need this extra > state. > > This allows the sysfs to represent all possible states an rfkill > driver can > have. > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian(a)mickler.org> > --- > > After stumbling over this arbitrary limitation of > sys/class/rfkill/*/state I > wondered what would hinder this patch? This is not backward compatible, so can't be done. johannes
From: Florian Mickler on 20 Feb 2010 18:10 On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:14:48 +0100 Johannes Berg <johannes(a)sipsolutions.net> wrote: > On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 22:40 +0100, florian(a)mickler.org wrote: > > Introduce a new state-value RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_AND_HARD_BLOCKED > > which is returned only through the sysfs state file. > > The other interfaces are designed so that they don't need this extra > > state. > > > > This allows the sysfs to represent all possible states an rfkill > > driver can > > have. > > > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian(a)mickler.org> > > --- > > > > After stumbling over this arbitrary limitation of > > sys/class/rfkill/*/state I > > wondered what would hinder this patch? > > This is not backward compatible, so can't be done. > > johannes hmm... ah, i see... if driver is in hard'n'soft-block state an userspace program would expect to read hardblock instead of the new hard'n'softblock-state... now that i think of it, it even becomes obvious :) cheers, Flo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Marcel Holtmann on 21 Feb 2010 05:10
Hi Florian, > > > Introduce a new state-value RFKILL_STATE_SOFT_AND_HARD_BLOCKED > > > which is returned only through the sysfs state file. > > > The other interfaces are designed so that they don't need this extra > > > state. > > > > > > This allows the sysfs to represent all possible states an rfkill > > > driver can > > > have. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Florian Mickler <florian(a)mickler.org> > > > --- > > > > > > After stumbling over this arbitrary limitation of > > > sys/class/rfkill/*/state I > > > wondered what would hinder this patch? > > > > This is not backward compatible, so can't be done. > > > > johannes > > hmm... ah, i see... if driver is in hard'n'soft-block state > an userspace program would expect to read hardblock instead of the > new hard'n'softblock-state... > now that i think of it, it even becomes obvious :) a userspace program would be expected to use /dev/rfkill and do this properly. Don't bother with sysfs at all. Regards Marcel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |