Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Use input_device_enabled()

[Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 12:15:27PM -0400, Mark Pearson wrote:
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, at 11:52 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > Hi Mark,
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 10:51:53AM -0400, Mark Pearson wrote:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Wed, Aug 5, 2026, at 12:03 AM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> >> > From: Andrzej Pietrasiewicz <andrzej.p@collabora.com>
> >> >
> >> > Use the new helper. Inspecting input device's 'users' member needs to be
> >> > done under device's mutex, so add appropriate invocations.
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Andrzej Pietrasiewicz <andrzej.p@collabora.com>
> >> > Acked-by: Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>
> >> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200608112211.12125-7-andrzej.p@collabora.com
> >> > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > Not sure how this got stuck in my patch queue but it is still valid...
> >> >
> >> >  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c | 4 +++-
> >> >  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c 
> >> > b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> >> > index 445e1403308e..f8e116e8a65d 100644
> >> > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> >> > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> >> > @@ -2547,9 +2547,10 @@ static void hotkey_poll_setup(const bool 
> >> > may_warn)
> >> > 
> >> >  	lockdep_assert_held(&hotkey_mutex);
> >> > 
> >> > +	mutex_lock(&tpacpi_inputdev->mutex);
> >> >  	if (hotkey_poll_freq > 0 &&
> >> >  	    (poll_driver_mask ||
> >> > -	     (poll_user_mask && tpacpi_inputdev->users > 0))) {
> >> > +	     (poll_user_mask && input_device_enabled(tpacpi_inputdev)))) {
> >> >  		if (!tpacpi_hotkey_task) {
> >> >  			tpacpi_hotkey_task = kthread_run(hotkey_kthread,
> >> >  					NULL, TPACPI_NVRAM_KTHREAD_NAME);
> >> > @@ -2566,6 +2567,7 @@ static void hotkey_poll_setup(const bool may_warn)
> >> >  				  poll_user_mask, poll_driver_mask);
> >> >  		}
> >> >  	}
> >> > +	mutex_unlock(&tpacpi_inputdev->mutex);
> >> >  }
> >> > 
> >> >  static void hotkey_poll_setup_safe(const bool may_warn)
> >> > -- 
> >> 
> >> Looks good to me.
> >> 
> >> Only note is that can you use guard(mutex)(&tpacpi_inputdev->mutex) instead of the lock/unlock? I think that's preferred these days.
> >
> > If that is desired the whole driver needs converting. I can do it in a
> > separate patch(es) if you want.
> >
> Ah - good point. Not worth it for this IMO, unless the more experienced maintainers have a strong opinion :)

Well, I went and did it anyways in case you want to apply it.

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry