Re: [PATCH 2/2] enhance /sys/class/rfkill/<rfkill>/state interface

[Florian Mickler]

On Sat, 20 Feb 2010 23:14:48 +0100
Johannes Berg <johannes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Sat, 2010-02-20 at 22:40 +0100, florian@xxxxxxxxxxx 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@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > 
> > 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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/