On Fri, Sep 05, 2014 at 11:14:04AM -0600, Azael Avalos wrote:
> Some Toshiba models with illumination support set a different
> value on the returned codes, thus not allowing the illumination
> LED to be registered, where it should be.
>
> This patch removes a check from toshiba_illumination_available
> function to allow such models to register the illumination LED.
>
> Signed-off-by: Azael Avalos <coproscefalo@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/toshiba_acpi.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/toshiba_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/toshiba_acpi.c
> index a149bc6..4803e7b 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/toshiba_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/toshiba_acpi.c
> @@ -436,7 +436,7 @@ static int toshiba_illumination_available(struct toshiba_acpi_dev *dev)
> if (ACPI_FAILURE(status) || out[0] == HCI_FAILURE) {
> pr_err("ACPI call to query Illumination support failed\n");
> return 0;
> - } else if (out[0] == HCI_NOT_SUPPORTED || out[1] != 1) {
> + } else if (out[0] == HCI_NOT_SUPPORTED) {
OK, but by eliminating the check, supposedly certain models which do not support
illumination but do not report it via out[0], but instead via out[1], will now
attempt to use illumination - correct?
The end result being user calls to an ACPI function which at best doesn't exist
and at worst.... does, but does something entirely different.
I admit the potential for a problem is slight, but is it possible to check
something explicit for support on the newer models rather than removing an
existing check?
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
