From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Len Brown Subject: Re: [PATCH 8/8] ACPI: DMI blacklist to reduce console warnings on OSI(Linux) systems. Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:35:03 -0500 Message-ID: <200801232335.03453.lenb@kernel.org> References: <1201141967-28134-1-git-send-email-lenb@kernel.org> <200801240255.15294.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:39551 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752461AbYAXEfS (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Jan 2008 23:35:18 -0500 In-Reply-To: <200801240255.15294.carlos@strangeworlds.co.uk> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Carlos Corbacho Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Wednesday 23 January 2008 21:55, Carlos Corbacho wrote: > Why not just match on: > > > + .ident = "Acer", > > + .matches = { > > + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "Acer"), > > + }, > > + }, > > for all Acer laptops? hmmm, because I assumed that dmi_check_system() would do an exact string compare with "!strcmp()". I'm surprised to discover it uses strstr() and matches substrings instead. Is there logic behind that? Certainly it makes using a single entry to match a vendor problematic, as a short vendor string could potentially be a substring of a different (unknown) vendor... -Len