Re: [PATCH] rfkill: clarify usage of rfkill_force_state() and rfkill->get_state()

[Ivo van Doorn]

On Thursday 18 September 2008, Johannes Berg wrote:
> 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...

Yeah, unfortunately that wasn't the probablematic part. ;)
Anyway when I have some time available I'll see if I can sort it out and
make it work. But that will not be for another week or 2.

Ivo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/