From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: akpm@linux-foundation.org (Andrew Morton) Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 23:15:37 -0800 Subject: [PATCHv4] INPUT: Route keyboard LEDs through the generic LEDs layer. In-Reply-To: <5487EFAC.3070402@openwrt.org> References: <20141210010214.GZ3074@type.youpi.perso.aquilenet.fr> <5487EFAC.3070402@openwrt.org> Message-ID: <20141209231537.42052501.akpm@linux-foundation.org> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:01:00 +0100 John Crispin wrote: > Hi > > On 10/12/2014 02:02, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > This permits to reassign keyboard LEDs to something else than keyboard "leds" > > state, by adding keyboard led and modifier triggers connected to a series > > of VT input LEDs, themselves connected to VT input triggers, which > > per-input device LEDs use by default. Userland can thus easily change the LED > > behavior of (a priori) all input devices, or of particular input devices. > > > > This also permits to fix #7063 from userland by using a modifier to implement > > proper CapsLock behavior and have the keyboard caps lock led show that modifier > > state. > > > > [ebroder at mokafive.com: Rebased to 3.2-rc1 or so, cleaned up some includes, and fixed some constants] > > [blogic at openwrt.org: CONFIG_INPUT_LEDS stubs should be static inline] > > [akpm at linux-foundation.org: remove unneeded `extern', fix comment layout] > > Signed-off-by: Samuel Thibault > > Signed-off-by: Evan Broder > > Reviewed-by: David Herrmann > > Tested-by: Pavel Machek > > Acked-by: Peter Korsgaard > > Signed-off-by: John Crispin > > I am not sure why my SoB was added. I originally sent a trivial fix up > for a header file as linux-next was not building (this was a year or > more ago). I never reviewed this patch nor have I tested it and I > certainly was not involved in the development. the patch simply broke > the compile of the Mips based Wifi and DSL SoCs that i maitain. > > ... > > this #else part was added by me to make sure that linux-next was > building again. this really does not qualify my SoB being added. > The SOB is appropriate - you made a change to the code and (presumably) attached your SOB to that. The change is briefly described there: > [blogic at openwrt.org: CONFIG_INPUT_LEDS stubs should be static inline]