2010/11/17 Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]>: > Devices which use LO enabled bit are covered by b43legacy > > Signed-off-by: Rafał Miłecki <[email protected]> > --- > V2: Dropped some not needed stuff as pointed by Michael, thanks! > > John: it's .38 ofc. > --- > drivers/net/wireless/b43/rfkill.c | 19 ++----------------- > 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/rfkill.c > b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/rfkill.c > index 78016ae..86bc0a0 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/b43/rfkill.c > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/b43/rfkill.c > @@ -28,23 +28,8 @@ > /* Returns TRUE, if the radio is enabled in hardware. */ > bool b43_is_hw_radio_enabled(struct b43_wldev *dev) > { > - if (dev->phy.rev >= 3 || dev->phy.type == B43_PHYTYPE_LP) { > - if (!(b43_read32(dev, B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_HI) > - & B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_HI_MASK)) > - return 1; > - } else { > - /* To prevent CPU fault on PPC, do not read a register > - * unless the interface is started; however, on resume > - * for hibernation, this routine is entered early. When > - * that happens, unconditionally return TRUE. > - */ > - if (b43_status(dev) < B43_STAT_STARTED) > - return 1; > - if (b43_read16(dev, B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_LO) > - & B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_LO_MASK) > - return 1; > - } > - return 0;
Is there any reason why this bool originally returned 1 or 0 instead of true or false? > + return !(b43_read32(dev, B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_HI) > + & B43_MMIO_RADIO_HWENABLED_HI_MASK); > } > > /* The poll callback for the hardware button. */ > -- > 1.6.0.4 > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in > the body of a message to [email protected] > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- Vista: [V]iruses, [I]ntruders, [S]pyware, [T]rojans and [A]dware. :-) _______________________________________________ b43-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/b43-dev
