Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:04:56 -0500 | From | "Dmitry Torokhov" <> | Subject | Re: [RFC] rfkill - Add support for input key to control wireless radio |
| |
On 12/6/06, Ivo van Doorn <ivdoorn@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > 2 - Hardware key that does not control the hardware radio and does not report anything to userspace > > > > Kind of uninteresting button ;) > > And this is the button that rfkill was originally designed for. > Laptops with integrated WiFi cards from Ralink have a hardware button that don't send anything to > userspace (unless the ACPI event is read) and does not directly control the radio itself. >
So what does such a button do? I am confused here...
... > > And this event should be reported by a generic approach right? So it should > be similar as with your point 2 below. But this would mean that the driver > should create the input device. Or can a driver send the KEY_WIFI event > over a main layer without the need of a personal input device? > I am not that familiar with the input device layer in the kernel, and this is > my first attempt on creating something for it, so I might have missed something. ;)
Yes, I think the driver should just create an input device. You may provide a generic implementation for a polled button and have driver instantiate it but I do not think that a single RFkill button device is needed - you won't have too many of them in a single system anyway (I think you will normally have 1, 2 at the most).
... > > 3. A device without transmitter but with a button - just register with > > input core. Userspace will have to manage state of other devices with > > transmitters in response to button presses. > > This is clear too. Rfkill is only intended for drivers that control a device with > a transmitter (WiFi, Bluetooth, IRDA) that have a button that is intended to > do something with the radio/transmitter. > > > Does this make sense? > > Yes, this was what I intended to do with rfkill, so at that point we have > the same goal. >
I think it is almost the same. I also want support RF devices that can control radio state but lack a button. This is covered by mixing 2) and 3) in kernel and for userspace looks exactly like 2) with a button.
... > > > > I don't think a config option is a good idea unless by config option > > you mean a sysfs attribute. > > I indeed meant a sysfs attribute. I should have been more clear on this. :) >
OK :)
-- Dmitry - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |