hal, rfkill and compat-wireless (Re: [RFC/RFT] rtl8187: Implement rfkill support)

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Hin-Tak Leung<hintak.leung at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 11:28 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez<mcgrof at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Hin-Tak Leung<hintak.leung at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> (added list hal to To:, since it has become relevant; previous
>>> exchanges of the thread on linux-wireless)
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 5:29 PM, Hin-Tak Leung<hintak.leung at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 3:34 PM, Johannes Berg<johannes at sipsolutions.net> wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 2009-08-26 at 13:33 +0000, Hin-Tak Leung wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> > Or wait ... are you using compat-wireless?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, I am. I mentioned this and did wonder if the _backport/ part
>>>>>> in /sys/class is important.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, didn't see.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, that's pretty clearly the reason -- Luis added NETDEV_PRE_UP to
>>>>> some compat*.h but obviously the kernel won't ever call that notifier,
>>>>> so cfg80211 doesn't get a chance to reject the IFUP. No idea how to
>>>>> handle that -- it'll be working fine in a regular tree.
>>>>>
>>>>> Luis, the only way to handle that would be to manually call the PRE_UP
>>>>> notifier from mac80211's subif_open() and if that returns an error
>>>>> (warning: the calling convention is weird) return the error... that's
>>>>> weird but would work.
>>>>>
>>>>> johannes
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hmm, got a bit side-tracked. But hal doesn't know the device having a
>>>> killswitch is still wrong somewhere?
>>>> (i.e. am wondering where we should advertise that ability, or how hal
>>>> works that out)
>>>>
>>>> Hin-Tak
>>>>
>>>
>>> I looked into hal and I can now say that it is certainly not
>>> compat-wireless "rfkill_backport"-aware; apparently all it does is
>>> monitoring entries under /sys/class that it knows about. I made a
>>> quick hack:
>>
>> This is wrong, we just do not need to use rfkill_backport for sysfs
>> stuff, consider sending me patch that removes that hunk for
>> compat-wireless instead and test it.
>>
>>  Luis
>>
>
> Hmm, I did mention the other option - make rfkill_backport exposes its
> data structure as '/sys/class/rfkill' instead of
> '/sys/class/rfkill_backport'. Is there any reason why
> compat-wireless's rfkill_backport  does not called itself 'rfkill' and
> unload and replace the old rfkill? That would be much neater, and
> userland tools like hal won't need to know anything about
> compat-wireless.

Johannes, did kernels < 2.6.31 have /sys/class/rfkill ?

  Luis