Michael Buesch wrote:
> On Wednesday 19 September 2007 19:55:59 Larry Finger wrote:
>> Michael Buesch wrote:
>>> Also cleanup the code a bit and remove the inline.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Michael Buesch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> @@ -2214,7 +2229,7 @@ static int b43_chip_init(struct b43_wlde
>>>     b43_radio_turn_on(dev);
>>>     dev->radio_hw_enable = b43_is_hw_radio_enabled(dev);
>>>     b43dbg(dev->wl, "Radio %s by hardware\n",           
>>> <========================
>>> -          (dev->radio_hw_enable == 0) ? "disabled" : "enabled");
>>> +          dev->radio_hw_enable ? "enabled" : "disabled");
>> Shouldn't this one be b43info rather than b43dbg?
> 
> No, I think it's really only interesting to see if it changed
> in operation.
> If it doesn't work, people will press their rfkill buttons
> before even noticing this message on init. :)

I have a suggestion to simplify the whole business of hardware radio control. 
Why don't we
unconditionally set radio_hw_enable to one here and dispense with this message? 
That way, people
without the rfkill switch will never see a message and those that do will only 
get messages if their
switch is off, or if it is toggled.

Larry
_______________________________________________
Bcm43xx-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/bcm43xx-dev

Reply via email to