Return-path: Received: from ist.d-labs.de ([213.239.218.44]:42480 "EHLO mx01.d-labs.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934212Ab0CLSSh (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 13:18:37 -0500 Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:18:19 +0100 From: Florian Mickler To: "John W. Linville" Cc: "Marcel Holtmann" , "Henrique de Moraes Holschuh" , "Johannes Berg" , linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, "Randy Dunlap" , "Alan Jenkins" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] rfkill sysfs ABI Message-ID: <20100312191819.73ac4700@schatten.dmk.lab> In-Reply-To: <1268416988-24862-1-git-send-email-florian@mickler.org> References: <1268416988-24862-1-git-send-email-florian@mickler.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 19:03:06 +0100 florian@mickler.org wrote: > Hi all! > > The first patch moves the rfkill sysfs ABI Documentation to Documentation/ABI > and deprecates the state and claim file. > > The second patch creates a replacement for the state file. Instead of exporting > some made-up state we just export the state of the 2 kill lines. > > The first patch should probably go into 2.6.34, as to warn users > (if there are any) early about this removal. > If there is no intent to remove the broken files, the feature-removal-schedule hunk > should probably be skipped. > > Cheers, > Flo > > p.s.: first discussion of this: http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/2/22/127 > Hi, sorry! I just realised that you already have the blocked_sw / blocked_hw one's queued. This just changes the name of blocked_sw and blocked_hw to "soft" and "hard". I don't know what you wanna do. I'm fine with blocked_hw and blocked_sw as it's referenced as such (hw/sw) in the code, but Marcel wanted to get away from the "hard blocked by hardware" notation, as it suggests that the transmitter could only be blocked by hardware... cheers, Flo