Return-path: Received: from an-out-0708.google.com ([209.85.132.240]:63262 "EHLO an-out-0708.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752737AbYKTQ1k (ORCPT ); Thu, 20 Nov 2008 11:27:40 -0500 Received: by an-out-0708.google.com with SMTP id d40so239158and.1 for ; Thu, 20 Nov 2008 08:27:38 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: (sfid-20081120_172744_055518_ECBA6B7E) Date: Thu, 20 Nov 2008 17:27:38 +0100 From: drago01 To: "John W. Linville" Subject: Re: [GIT PATCH] rfkill fixes for 2.6.28-rc3 Cc: "Ivo van Doorn" , "Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "Matthew Garrett" , "Alan Jenkins" In-Reply-To: <20081112211530.GH2411@tuxdriver.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 References: <1225730537-2679-1-git-send-email-hmh@hmh.eng.br> <200811031747.16326.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20081103170243.GB2417@khazad-dum.debian.net> <200811031820.41165.IvDoorn@gmail.com> <20081112211530.GH2411@tuxdriver.com> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 10:15 PM, John W. Linville wrote: > On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 06:20:40PM +0100, Ivo van Doorn wrote: >> On Monday 03 November 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >> > On Mon, 03 Nov 2008, Ivo van Doorn wrote: >> > > On Monday 03 November 2008, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: >> > > > This small patchset contains two fixes to issues in the suspend/resume >> > > > handling of the rfkill class core. >> > > > >> > > > It needs to go to 2.6.28. These patches are based on 2.6.28-rc3. >> > > >> > > Are they real regressions or normal bugfixes? >> > >> > I am not sure if they regress anything, but I am pretty sure there is no >> > bugzilla entry about them yet. I have added two more interested parties to >> > the CC. >> > >> > So, if there is a strong feeling this would best be held until the next >> > merge window, I can certainly respin the patches to on top of >> > wireless-testing... >> >> Well I'll give my ACK to the 2 patches, but I'll let john decide if they >> are "regression" enough for 2.6.28. ;) > > So I keep looking at these patches, and I'm not sure about them. > It seems that they restore the rfkill state after resume to what it > was before the suspend. Wouldn't this break hw kill switches? If I move the switch while the system is suspended it will ignore this event but the hw will still not work. > What I am unsure about is whether or not > that is the appropriate thing to do. I suppose it makes sense under > the rule of least surprise. Well the above scenario would be just broken. Unless the driver rereads the real hw state and updates the rfkill state on resume.