From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932795Ab2AEUYh (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:24:37 -0500 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:35122 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758287Ab2AEUYf (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2012 15:24:35 -0500 Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 14:24:29 -0600 From: Seth Forshee To: Matthew Garrett Cc: Len Brown , Azael Avalos , Thomas Renninger , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] toshiba_acpi: Add blacklist for models with hotkey problems Message-ID: <20120105202429.GF25386@ubuntu-macmini> Mail-Followup-To: Matthew Garrett , Len Brown , Azael Avalos , Thomas Renninger , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <1325617358-8286-1-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <1325617358-8286-5-git-send-email-seth.forshee@canonical.com> <20120105182627.GE24242@srcf.ucam.org> <20120105193228.GB25386@ubuntu-macmini> <20120105193431.GA26097@srcf.ucam.org> <20120105200432.GE25386@ubuntu-macmini> <20120105200925.GA26877@srcf.ucam.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20120105200925.GA26877@srcf.ucam.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 08:09:26PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 02:04:32PM -0600, Seth Forshee wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 05, 2012 at 07:34:31PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote: > > > In that case, can you check for the presence of the WMI interface and > > > then refuse to bind? That's seem far simpler than adding an unknown > > > number of systems to the blacklist. > > > > Hmm, I suppose I could look for the specific WMI event guid, although > > the relationship between the two seems tenuous at best. It would make > > sense to me if we were refusing to bind because there was a better > > interface available, but Toshiba is obviously treating hotkeys on the > > WMI interface as legacy since it's disabled in the BIOS for Vista or > > later. INFO seems to be the preferred interface. > > ...but doesn't work? Yes. But that's not because of the WMI interface. They both just belong to the same BIOS implementation. There's no reason why a future machine couldn't have this WMI interface along with a working INFO implementation. For now that's theoretical though, so I'll change it to use the guid instead of the blacklist. If such a machine appears in the future we can deal with it then.