Calling the ENAB method on Toshiba laptops results in notifications being
sent when laptop hotkeys are pressed. This patch simply calls that method
and sets up an input device if it's successful.
Signed-off-by: Matthew Garrett <mjg@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
Cc: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
Return from bt_rfkill_poll() when hci_get_radio_state() fails.
value is invalid in that case and should not be assigned to the rfkill
state.
This also fixes a double unlock bug.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
Cc: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Cc: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
This patch completely rewrites the rfkill core to address
the following deficiencies:
* all rfkill drivers need to implement polling where necessary
rather than having one central implementation
* updating the rfkill state cannot be done from arbitrary
contexts, forcing drivers to use schedule_work and requiring
lots of code
* rfkill drivers need to keep track of soft/hard blocked
internally -- the core should do this
* the rfkill API has many unexpected quirks, for example being
asymmetric wrt. alloc/free and register/unregister
* rfkill can call back into a driver from within a function the
driver called -- this is prone to deadlocks and generally
should be avoided
* rfkill-input pointlessly is a separate module
* drivers need to #ifdef rfkill functions (unless they want to
depend on or select RFKILL) -- rfkill should provide inlines
that do nothing if it isn't compiled in
* the rfkill structure is not opaque -- drivers need to initialise
it correctly (lots of sanity checking code required) -- instead
force drivers to pass the right variables to rfkill_alloc()
* the documentation is hard to read because it always assumes the
reader is completely clueless and contains way TOO MANY CAPS
* the rfkill code needlessly uses a lot of locks and atomic
operations in locked sections
* fix LED trigger to actually change the LED when the radio state
changes -- this wasn't done before
Tested-by: Alan Jenkins <alan-jenkins@tuffmail.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br> [thinkpad]
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Almost all drivers do not support user_claim, so remove it
completely and always report -EOPNOTSUPP to userspace. Since
userspace cannot really drive rfkill _anyway_ (due to the
odd restrictions imposed by the documentation) having this
code is just pointless.
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Signed-off-by: John W. Linville <linville@tuxdriver.com>
Setting ->owner as done currently (pde->owner = THIS_MODULE) is racy
as correctly noted at bug #12454. Someone can lookup entry with NULL
->owner, thus not pinning enything, and release it later resulting
in module refcount underflow.
We can keep ->owner and supply it at registration time like ->proc_fops
and ->data.
But this leaves ->owner as easy-manipulative field (just one C assignment)
and somebody will forget to unpin previous/pin current module when
switching ->owner. ->proc_fops is declared as "const" which should give
some thoughts.
->read_proc/->write_proc were just fixed to not require ->owner for
protection.
rmmod'ed directories will be empty and return "." and ".." -- no harm.
And directories with tricky enough readdir and lookup shouldn't be modular.
We definitely don't want such modular code.
Removing ->owner will also make PDE smaller.
So, let's nuke it.
Kudos to Jeff Layton for reminding about this, let's say, oversight.
http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12454
Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>
These are platform specific drivers that happen to use ACPI,
while drivers/acpi/ is for code that implements ACPI itself.
Signed-off-by: Len Brown <len.brown@intel.com>
