On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2009 at 07:01:46PM -0200, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> > On Thu, 24 Dec 2009, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > > + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sony_laptop_input_keycode_map); i++)
> > > + __set_bit(sony_laptop_input_keycode_map[i], key_dev->keybit);
> > > + __clear_bit(KEY_RESERVED, key_dev->keybit);
> >
> > Maybe:
> >
> > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(sony_laptop_input_keycode_map); i++) {
> > if (sony_laptop_input_keycode_map[i] != KEY_RESERVED) {
> > input_set_capability(key_dev, EV_KEY,
> > sony_laptop_input_keycode_map[i]);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > would be better, as it means the driver doesn't poke into the inputdev
> > struct innards directly?
>
> Given that you have to still poke there to set up open, close, name,
> phys, id and so on and so forth I think the original is fine and that is
> what most of keyboard-like drivers do.
Never liked that much, either :-)
> The reason I came up with input_set_capability is because gpio-keys
> wanted to set up siwtches and keys based on platform data so doing;
>
> for(...)
> input_set_capability(dev, pdata->type, pdata->code);
>
> looked nice.
I see. Well, it is a matter of differing tastes I think (none of them bad,
just different).
That said, is KEY_RESERVED bit left set a common error? If it is, maybe it
make sense to __clear_bit it inside of input_register_device() just in case?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find them. One disk to bring
them all and in the darkness grind them. In the Land of Redmond
where the shadows lie." -- The Silicon Valley Tarot
Henrique Holschuh
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
