dell-laptop: Remove rfkill code
a6c2390cd6d2083d27a2359658e08f2d3df375ac
This patch causes some trouble with my dell laptop (Vostro 3300). It produces some annoying behaviour with the Wifi kill-switch.
As rfkill can not get the state of the physical kill-switch, both state may differ.
physical switch is OFF
rfkill state is ON
=> Laptop hangs on boot (maybe because a physical ascent device is used by network subsystem)
physical switch is OFF
rfkill state is OFF
=> Activate interface in Gnome Connection Manager => System hang
test setup:
Dell Vostro 3300
Broadcom 4313 Wifi
Kernel 3.5.[0-2] & 3.6
Fedora 17
---
Again this is an example for patches accepted in mainline without being tested on supported hardware :-(
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:53:21PM +0200, Sebastian P?hn wrote:
> As rfkill can not get the state of the physical kill-switch, both state may differ.
b43 should know the state of the physical rfkill switch even if there's
no platform code to support it.
--
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]
On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 14:14 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:53:21PM +0200, Sebastian Pöhn wrote:
>
> > As rfkill can not get the state of the physical kill-switch, both state may differ.
>
> b43 should know the state of the physical rfkill switch even if there's
> no platform code to support it.
>
BCM 4313 is _only_ supported by BCMs proprietar driver and brcmsmac; and
the later one I use.
Further there should be problems with other Wifis, like Intel?
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 03:46:43PM +0200, Sebastian Poehn wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-08-23 at 14:14 +0100, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:53:21PM +0200, Sebastian P?hn wrote:
> >
> > > As rfkill can not get the state of the physical kill-switch, both state may differ.
> >
> > b43 should know the state of the physical rfkill switch even if there's
> > no platform code to support it.
> >
> BCM 4313 is _only_ supported by BCMs proprietar driver and brcmsmac; and
> the later one I use.
Ok, well definitely seems like a bug in brcmsmac.
> Further there should be problems with other Wifis, like Intel?
Why?
--
Matthew Garrett | [email protected]