From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Woithe Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: fujitsu-laptop: Don't oops when FUJ02E3 is not presnt Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 13:51:50 +0930 Message-ID: <20170919042150.GD10399@marvin.atrad.com.au> References: <20170918200059.16279-1-ville.syrjala@linux.intel.com> <20170919040648.GA8426@kmp-mobile.hq.kempniu.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from server.atrad.com.au ([150.101.241.2]:39378 "EHLO server.atrad.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750765AbdISEfM (ORCPT ); Tue, 19 Sep 2017 00:35:12 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170919040648.GA8426@kmp-mobile.hq.kempniu.pl> Sender: platform-driver-x86-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Micha?? K??pie?? Cc: Ville Syrjala , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, Darren Hart , Andy Shevchenko Hi Michal On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 06:06:48AM +0200, Micha?? K??pie?? wrote: > > My Fujitsu-Siemens Lifebook S6120 doesn't have the FUJ02E3 device, > > but it does have FUJ02B1. That means we do register the backlight > > device (and it even seems to work), but the code will oops as soon > > as we try to set the backlight brightness because it's trying to > > call call_fext_func() with a NULL device. Let's just skip those > > function calls when the FUJ02E3 device is not present. > > Oh, the irony... I have literally just sat down to dust off the patch > series I have had queued for the past couple of months which makes the > driver for FUJ02B1 a separate module depending on the FUJ02E3 driver. > Then I saw your email and it is now clear that such a dependency is > bogus. AFAIR, until now everyone involved was expecting the FUJ02E3 > ACPI device to be present on all Fujitsu laptops. Yes, this was the general concensus (although admittedly it was based on a relatively small sample of Fujitsu models). > I need to refresh my memory a bit and think about next steps. I still > have one more cleanup series queued that is worth posting and I also > need to fix radio LED detection. My spare time is still very limited, > but I will do my best to post something soon. In the meantime, I think we ought to consider pushing the proposed patch in order to restore functionality for the S6120 - as it stands the code oopses, which isn't great. Is there any reason not to do so? Regards jonathan