On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 04:42:08PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 02:38:06PM +0300, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 01:36:27PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2023 at 02:17:28PM +0530, Raag Jadav wrote:
> > > > Convert manual _UID references to use standard ACPI helpers.
> > >
> > > Yes, while not so obvious this is the correct replacement.
> > > Reviewed-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > I think this is the only case which would suffer from the more obvious
> > behaviour, i.e.
>
> No, that's not true. The same with override CPU in the other patch, where the
> check is simply absent, but the result will be the same. So, all with negation
> will suffer from the "obvious" implementation.
Forgot to add, we don't need to change the original acpi_dev_hid_uid_match()
behaviour, i.e.
bool acpi_dev_hid_uid_match(struct acpi_device *adev,
const char *hid2, const char *uid2)
{
const char *hid1 = acpi_device_hid(adev);
if (strcmp(hid1, hid2))
return false;
if (!uid2)
return true;
return acpi_dev_uid_match(adev, uid2);
}
I'm fine with both, this just makes more sense to me.
Raag
