Return-path: Received: from out4.smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:35771 "EHLO out4.smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751286AbZK1N1u (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 08:27:50 -0500 Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:27:52 -0200 From: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh To: Johannes Berg Cc: Alan Jenkins , Marcel Holtmann , "linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" , Ian Molton , linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, Corentin Chary Subject: Re: rfkill: persistent device suspend/resume Message-ID: <20091128132752.GD17373@khazad-dum.debian.net> References: <4A37A3E1.8060606@tuffmail.co.uk> <1245161645.13461.3.camel@johannes.local> <4A37AEB7.6060405@tuffmail.co.uk> <20090618030806.GE29569@khazad-dum.debian.net> <20091128124158.GB17373@khazad-dum.debian.net> <1259413945.5428.21.camel@johannes.local> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <1259413945.5428.21.camel@johannes.local> Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 28 Nov 2009, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2009-11-28 at 10:41 -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > > What do you guys think? I will cook up a patch to implement the above, but > > if there are any objections to the idea, I'd like to hear it ASAP, as I do > > have a regression to fix :) > > What part of that don't we do? > > static int rfkill_resume(struct device *dev) > { > struct rfkill *rfkill = to_rfkill(dev); > bool cur; > > if (!rfkill->persistent) { > cur = !!(rfkill->state & RFKILL_BLOCK_SW); > rfkill_set_block(rfkill, cur); > } The issue I am reporting is _only_ about persistent devices, so it is the if(!rfkill->persistent) that is the problem. It works perfectly for the other devices. -- "One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot Henrique Holschuh