On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 10:42:31PM +0800, Lan Tianyu wrote: > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/battery.c b/drivers/acpi/battery.c > index fbf1ace..e98fa83 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/battery.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/battery.c > @@ -770,7 +770,7 @@ static int acpi_battery_add(struct acpi_device *device) > device->driver_data = battery; > mutex_init(&battery->lock); > mutex_init(&battery->sysfs_lock); > - if (acpi_has_method(battery->device->handle, "_BIX")) > + if (acpi_evaluate_object(device->handle, "_BIX", NULL, &buffer);) > set_bit(ACPI_BATTERY_XINFO_PRESENT, &battery->flags); Doesn't acpi_evaluate_object() return 0 on success? I think: if (ACPI_SUCESS(acpi_evaluate_object(device->handle, "_BIX", NULL, &buffer)) But maybe we should check for existence first and give an FW_BUG message to indicate an invalid _BIX? -- Matthew Garrett | mjg59@xxxxxxxxxxxxx -- 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
