Le 02/08/2024 à 11:36, Qiang Ma a écrit :
After we turn on the keyboard CAPSL LED and let the system suspend,
the keyboard LED is not off, and the kernel log is as follows:
[ 185.987574] i8042: [44060] ed -> i8042 (kbd-data)
[ 185.988057] i8042: [44061] ** <- i8042 (interrupt, 0, 1)
[ 185.988067] i8042: [44061] 04 -> i8042 (kbd-data)
[ 185.988248] i8042: [44061] ** <- i8042 (interrupt, 0, 1)
The log shows that after the command 0xed is sent, the data
sent is 0x04 instead of 0x00.
Solution:
Add a bitmap variable ledon in the atkbd structure, and then set ledon
according to code-value in the event, in the atkbd_set_leds() function,
first look at the value of ledon, if it is 0, there is no need to
look at the value of dev->led, otherwise, need to look at dev->led
to determine the keyboard LED on/off.
Signed-off-by: Qiang Ma <maqianga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx>
Hmmm, no.
I just made a few comments on v1.
That does not mean a Signed-off-by at all.
---
V2:
- Fixed formatting and spelling errors
- Optimized some code
A good practice is also to give the link to previous versions. It can
help reviewers who maybe missed part of the story.
v1:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240726102730.24836-1-maqianga@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
drivers/input/keyboard/atkbd.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/atkbd.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/atkbd.c
index 7f67f9f2946b..fb479bc78134 100644
--- a/drivers/input/keyboard/atkbd.c
+++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/atkbd.c
@@ -237,6 +237,8 @@ struct atkbd {
struct mutex mutex;
struct vivaldi_data vdata;
+
+ DECLARE_BITMAP(ledon, LED_CNT);
};
/*
@@ -604,24 +606,32 @@ static int atkbd_set_repeat_rate(struct atkbd *atkbd)
return ps2_command(&atkbd->ps2dev, ¶m, ATKBD_CMD_SETREP);
}
+#define ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, type, v, bits, on) \
Is there a real advantage for 'bits' and 'on'?
They always match with 'led' and 'ledon' below.
And 'atkbd' and 'dev' are already hard coded below anyway.
I just find it confusing and harder to read.
Also, in order to be less verbose, maybe ATKBD_LED_TOGGLE or
ATKBD_TOGGLE_LED would just be as clear with fewer char?
CJ
+({ \
+ unsigned char __tmp = 0; \
+ if (test_bit(LED_##type, atkbd->on)) \
+ __tmp = test_bit(LED_##type, dev->bits) ? v : 0; \
+ __tmp; \
+})
+
static int atkbd_set_leds(struct atkbd *atkbd)
{
struct input_dev *dev = atkbd->dev;
unsigned char param[2];
- param[0] = (test_bit(LED_SCROLLL, dev->led) ? 1 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_NUML, dev->led) ? 2 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_CAPSL, dev->led) ? 4 : 0);
+ param[0] = ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, SCROLLL, 1, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, NUML, 2, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, CAPSL, 4, led, ledon);
if (ps2_command(&atkbd->ps2dev, param, ATKBD_CMD_SETLEDS))
return -1;
if (atkbd->extra) {
param[0] = 0;
- param[1] = (test_bit(LED_COMPOSE, dev->led) ? 0x01 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_SLEEP, dev->led) ? 0x02 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_SUSPEND, dev->led) ? 0x04 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_MISC, dev->led) ? 0x10 : 0)
- | (test_bit(LED_MUTE, dev->led) ? 0x20 : 0);
+ param[1] = ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, COMPOSE, 0x01, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, SLEEP, 0x02, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, SUSPEND, 0x04, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, MISC, 0x10, led, ledon)
+ | ATKBD_DO_LED_TOGGLE(dev, atkbd, MUTE, 0x20, led, ledon);
if (ps2_command(&atkbd->ps2dev, param, ATKBD_CMD_EX_SETLEDS))
return -1;
}
@@ -695,6 +705,11 @@ static int atkbd_event(struct input_dev *dev,
switch (type) {
case EV_LED:
+ if (value)
+ __set_bit(code, atkbd->ledon);
+ else
+ __clear_bit(code, atkbd->ledon);
+
atkbd_schedule_event_work(atkbd, ATKBD_LED_EVENT_BIT);
return 0;
