On Friday, June 04, 2010 08:24:04 pm Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> If primary ID (HID) is invalid try locating first valid ID on compatible
> ID list before giving up.
>
> This helps, for example, to recognize i8042 AUX port on Sony Vaio VPCZ1
> which uses SNYSYN0003 as HID. Without the patch users are forced to
> boot with i8042.nopnp to make use of their touchpads.
Sorry, we seem to have dropped the ball on this. Looking at it again,
I have another question below:
> drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c b/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
> index f7ff628..2029cb5 100644
> --- a/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/pnp/pnpacpi/core.c
> @@ -28,7 +28,7 @@
> #include "../base.h"
> #include "pnpacpi.h"
>
> -static int num = 0;
> +static int num;
>
> /* We need only to blacklist devices that have already an acpi driver that
> * can't use pnp layer. We don't need to blacklist device that are directly
> @@ -157,11 +157,24 @@ struct pnp_protocol pnpacpi_protocol = {
> };
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(pnpacpi_protocol);
>
> +static char *pnpacpi_get_id(struct acpi_device *device)
> +{
> + struct acpi_hardware_id *id;
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(id, &device->pnp.ids, list) {
> + if (ispnpidacpi(id->id))
> + return id->id;
> + }
> +
> + return NULL;
> +}
> +
> static int __init pnpacpi_add_device(struct acpi_device *device)
> {
> acpi_handle temp = NULL;
> acpi_status status;
> struct pnp_dev *dev;
> + char *pnpid;
> struct acpi_hardware_id *id;
>
> /*
> @@ -169,11 +182,17 @@ static int __init pnpacpi_add_device(struct acpi_device *device)
> * driver should not be loaded.
> */
> status = acpi_get_handle(device->handle, "_CRS", &temp);
> - if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || !ispnpidacpi(acpi_device_hid(device)) ||
> - is_exclusive_device(device) || (!device->status.present))
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + return 0;
> +
> + pnpid = pnpacpi_get_id(device);
> + if (!pnpid)
> + return 0;
> +
> + if (!is_exclusive_device(device) || !device->status.present)
> return 0;
Doesn't this change the sense of the is_exclusive_device() test?
Looks good to me otherwise.
Bjorn
> - dev = pnp_alloc_dev(&pnpacpi_protocol, num, acpi_device_hid(device));
> + dev = pnp_alloc_dev(&pnpacpi_protocol, num, pnpid);
> if (!dev)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> @@ -204,7 +223,7 @@ static int __init pnpacpi_add_device(struct acpi_device *device)
> pnpacpi_parse_resource_option_data(dev);
>
> list_for_each_entry(id, &device->pnp.ids, list) {
> - if (!strcmp(id->id, acpi_device_hid(device)))
> + if (!strcmp(id->id, pnpid))
> continue;
> if (!ispnpidacpi(id->id))
> continue;
>
>
--
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
