From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Takashi Iwai Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 2/3] x86: add support for Huawei WMI hotkeys. Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 12:02:39 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20181127025752.6459-1-ayman.bagabas@gmail.com> <20181127025752.6459-3-ayman.bagabas@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20181127025752.6459-3-ayman.bagabas@gmail.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Ayman Bagabas Cc: alsa-devel@alsa-project.org, Hui Wang , Andy Shevchenko , Darren Hart , Jaroslav Kysela , Kailang Yang , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org List-Id: platform-driver-x86.vger.kernel.org Some more forgotten bits... On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 03:57:48 +0100, Ayman Bagabas wrote: > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/Kconfig .... > +config HUAWEI_WMI > + tristate "Huawei WMI hotkeys driver" > + depends on ACPI_WMI > + depends on INPUT > + select INPUT_SPARSEKMAP > + select LEDS_TRIGGERS > + select LEDS_TRIGGER_AUDIO I guess "select LEDS_CLASS" is needed as well. Other drivers had already it. > --- /dev/null > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/huawei-wmi.c .... > +static int huawei_wmi_micmute_led_set(bool on) > +{ > + acpi_handle handle; > + char *method; > + union acpi_object args[3]; > + struct acpi_object_list arg_list = { > + .pointer = args, > + .count = ARRAY_SIZE(args), > + }; > + > + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(&inputdev->dev); > + args[0].type = args[1].type = args[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER; > + args[1].integer.value = 0x04; > + > + if (acpi_has_method(handle, method = "\\_SB.PCI0.LPCB.EC0.SPIN")) { This looks ugly... And checkpatch also complains. > + args[0].integer.value = 0; > + args[2].integer.value = on ? 1 : 0; > + } else if (acpi_has_method(handle, method = "\\_SB.PCI0.LPCB.EC0.WPIN")) { > + args[0].integer.value = 1; > + args[2].integer.value = on ? 0 : 1; > + } else { > + dev_err(&inputdev->dev, "Unable to find ACPI method\n"); > + return -ENOSYS; > + } Can these checks be done at initialization phase? It doesn't seem needed to be executed at each call. thanks, Takashi