From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Garrett Subject: Re: [PATCH] sony-laptop: support rfkill via ACPI interfaces Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:00:04 +0000 Message-ID: <20090320140004.GA4882@srcf.ucam.org> References: <20090319212123.GA24700@srcf.ucam.org> <20090320085213.GC4743@kamineko.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from cavan.codon.org.uk ([93.93.128.6]:53993 "EHLO vavatch.codon.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750920AbZCTOAJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 10:00:09 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090320085213.GC4743@kamineko.org> Sender: linux-acpi-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org To: Mattia Dongili Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 05:52:14PM +0900, Mattia Dongili wrote: > I'm more of the idea to provide a module option to force the setup > callback if the module is not in the DMI list. > Although for now all of the models that have SN07 and friends seem to > benefit from throwing some magic numbers at them. I suspect that this is how new machines expect to be controlled. > > calling the ECON method on the SNC since some codepaths in the tables > > seem to depend on them - but I'm also worried to a certain extent on how > > much that might change driver interactions with some machines. > > My understanding about ECON is that it is always enabled if the embedded > controller is enabled. The SPIC device has the same kind of dependency > and as far as I could see ECON is always 1. So I don't think it makes > much of a difference. I had one machine where ECON seemed to need to be called explicitly, but I can't remember the details now. Calling it probably wouldn't hurt anything. > do we really need to unregister if registering failed? > Looking at rfkill_{un,}register this seems unnecessary while an > rfkill_free seems more appropriate. > The same applies for the other rfkill setup functions. Yeah, I'll fix that up. > > + acpi_callsetfunc(sony_nc_acpi_handle, "SN07", 0x101, &result); > > + > > + acpi_callsetfunc(sony_nc_acpi_handle, "SN07", 0xb03, &result); > > hummm, this is very similar to the callback setup executed when matching > the snc dmi list. > On which vaio model did you get this numbers? Did you find the other > initialization path (the one dependent on the DMI list) any useful on > that model? i.e.: do you need both? The numbers correspond to enabling all events. I couldn't think of any reason why we'd only want to enable a subset. The current nc setup code seems to enable some events and then disable them again, which I don't really understand. -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@srcf.ucam.org