Am 20.11.24 um 16:37 schrieb Mario Limonciello:
On 11/20/2024 09:09, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
On Tue, 19 Nov 2024, Mario Limonciello wrote:
As multiple platform profile handlers may come and go, send a
notification
to userspace each time that a platform profile handler is registered or
unregistered.
Reviewed-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@xxxxxx>
Tested-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Matthew Schwartz <matthew.schwartz@xxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
---
v7:
* Add Armin's tag
---
drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
index 1530e6096cd39..de0804305b02c 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/platform_profile.c
@@ -363,6 +363,8 @@ int platform_profile_register(struct
platform_profile_handler *pprof)
goto cleanup_ida;
}
+ sysfs_notify(acpi_kobj, NULL, "platform_profile");
+
cur_profile = pprof;
err = sysfs_update_group(acpi_kobj, &platform_profile_group);
Is the ordering problematic here, how long userspace has to wait for the
update to become visible?
TBH - this feels like an artifact of the earlier patches. I don't
know that we really need the notify anymore since calling
sysfs_update_group().
I'm tending to think drop this patch entirely.
I do not think so. A new platform profile handler might cause the platform profile choices to change. It might also cause the platform profile
to switch to "custom" in some cases. So i think we still have to keep this patch.
Thanks
@@ -393,6 +395,8 @@ int platform_profile_remove(struct
platform_profile_handler *pprof)
device_unregister(pprof->class_dev);
ida_free(&platform_profile_ida, id);
+ sysfs_notify(acpi_kobj, NULL, "platform_profile");
+
sysfs_update_group(acpi_kobj, &platform_profile_group);
