| Message ID | bdff67293ead344ccec77f55437085561b1ad88d.1448282995.git.lukas@wunner.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search > for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. You did add a pr_warn, which is technically a functional change. Did you intend to leave that in? I have no objection for platform-drivers-x86, but please include all maintainers listed by get_maintainer.pl for the fastest response. +Rafael Rafael, I assume you will pick this up along with the acpi_dev_present ACPI change if you take that. Pleaes let me know if not. Otherwise, Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com>
Hi Darren, On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:04:13AM -0800, Darren Hart wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search > > for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. > > You did add a pr_warn, which is technically a functional change. Did you intend > to leave that in? That's not an addition of mine, I moved it from eeepc_wmi_parse_device() to eeepc_wmi_probe() so that everything behaves exactly as before. (See the deleted lines further up in the patch.) > Rafael, I assume you will pick this up along with the acpi_dev_present ACPI > change if you take that. Pleaes let me know if not. The last patch in the series concerned Intel ASoC (sound/soc/intel/) and the maintainer Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> has replied that "This will collide with some other work done on the Intel code in -next I expect, probably best to merge this via ASoC (so pulling a shared branch for the new API) or just wait till 4.5 to do the conversion." [full quote of his message as it wasn't cc: platform-driver-x86] So I guess Mark might pull it in, haven't heard back from the ACPI maintainers yet. > Otherwise, > Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> Awesome, thanks! Best regards, Lukas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 08:55:27PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > Hi Darren, > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:04:13AM -0800, Darren Hart wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > > Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search > > > for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. > > > > You did add a pr_warn, which is technically a functional change. Did you intend > > to leave that in? > > That's not an addition of mine, I moved it from eeepc_wmi_parse_device() > to eeepc_wmi_probe() so that everything behaves exactly as before. > (See the deleted lines further up in the patch.) Ah, apologies. > > > > Rafael, I assume you will pick this up along with the acpi_dev_present ACPI > > change if you take that. Pleaes let me know if not. > > The last patch in the series concerned Intel ASoC (sound/soc/intel/) > and the maintainer Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org> has replied that > "This will collide with some other work done on the Intel code in -next I > expect, probably best to merge this via ASoC (so pulling a shared branch > for the new API) or just wait till 4.5 to do the conversion." > [full quote of his message as it wasn't cc: platform-driver-x86] > > So I guess Mark might pull it in, haven't heard back from the ACPI > maintainers yet. > I'll defer to Rafael's preference here.
On Monday, November 23, 2015 11:04:13 AM Darren Hart wrote: > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search > > for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. > > You did add a pr_warn, which is technically a functional change. Did you intend > to leave that in? > > I have no objection for platform-drivers-x86, but please include all maintainers > listed by get_maintainer.pl for the fastest response. > > +Rafael > > Rafael, I assume you will pick this up along with the acpi_dev_present ACPI > change if you take that. Pleaes let me know if not. > > Otherwise, > > Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> In fact, patch [1/5] as is needs to go in through upstream ACPICA, so I'm not taking this series and please don't take it too. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 11:35:55PM +0100, Rafael Wysocki wrote: > On Monday, November 23, 2015 11:04:13 AM Darren Hart wrote: > > On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 03:34:55PM +0100, Lukas Wunner wrote: > > > Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search > > > for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. > > > > You did add a pr_warn, which is technically a functional change. Did you intend > > to leave that in? > > > > I have no objection for platform-drivers-x86, but please include all maintainers > > listed by get_maintainer.pl for the fastest response. > > > > +Rafael > > > > Rafael, I assume you will pick this up along with the acpi_dev_present ACPI > > change if you take that. Pleaes let me know if not. > > > > Otherwise, > > > > Acked-by: Darren Hart <dvhart@linux.intel.com> > > In fact, patch [1/5] as is needs to go in through upstream ACPICA, so I'm not > taking this series and please don't take it too. Ah, thanks, my mistake.
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-wmi.c index 14fd2ec..e1490db 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-wmi.c +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-wmi.c @@ -204,30 +204,10 @@ static void eeepc_wmi_key_filter(struct asus_wmi_driver *asus_wmi, int *code, } } -static acpi_status eeepc_wmi_parse_device(acpi_handle handle, u32 level, - void *context, void **retval) -{ - pr_warn("Found legacy ATKD device (%s)\n", EEEPC_ACPI_HID); - *(bool *)context = true; - return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE; -} - -static int eeepc_wmi_check_atkd(void) -{ - acpi_status status; - bool found = false; - - status = acpi_get_devices(EEEPC_ACPI_HID, eeepc_wmi_parse_device, - &found, NULL); - - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !found) - return 0; - return -1; -} - static int eeepc_wmi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { - if (eeepc_wmi_check_atkd()) { + if (acpi_dev_present(EEEPC_ACPI_HID)) { + pr_warn("Found legacy ATKD device (%s)\n", EEEPC_ACPI_HID); pr_warn("WMI device present, but legacy ATKD device is also " "present and enabled\n"); pr_warn("You probably booted with acpi_osi=\"Linux\" or "
Use shiny new acpi_dev_present and remove all the boilerplate to search for a particular ACPI device. No functional change. Cc: Corentin Chary <corentin.chary@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de> --- drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-wmi.c | 24 ++---------------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)