… > Should I leave it like this, or deregister the attributes, so those cases are never triggered? > > I'm also not sure about the block of comments at the start describing the (guessed) format of the > packets, let me know if this should go somewhere else. > > Apologies if I've messed anything up, I've only sent fairly small patches until now :) Such information should not belong to the change description. It may be specified behind the marker line. https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.11-rc3#n711 … > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-corsair-void.c > @@ -0,0 +1,851 @@ … > +static void corsair_void_process_receiver(struct corsair_void_drvdata *drvdata, > + int raw_battery_capacity, > + int raw_connection_status, > + int raw_battery_status) > +{ … > + /* Set battery status */ > + switch (raw_battery_status) { > + case 1: > + case 2: > + case 3: /* Battery normal / low / critical */ … Will any enumeration values become more helpful here? … > +static int corsair_void_request_status(struct hid_device *hid_dev, int id) > +{ > + unsigned char *send_buf; > + int ret; > + > + send_buf = kzalloc(12, GFP_KERNEL); … Please improve the size determination (or explanation). … > +static int corsair_void_probe(struct hid_device *hid_dev, > + const struct hid_device_id *hid_id) > +{ … > +/*failed_after_hid_start: > + hid_hw_stop(hid_dev);*/ > +failed_after_sysfs: … I guess that you would not like to preserve code which was commented out. Regards, Markus
