On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 09:31:23PM +0100, Michał Kępień wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/dell-wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/dell-wmi.c
> > > index 65edd93..ffc957b5 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/dell-wmi.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/dell-wmi.c
> > > @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ static const struct key_entry dell_wmi_legacy_keymap[] __initconst = {
> > > { KE_IGNORE, 0xe020, { KEY_MUTE } },
> > >
> > > /* Shortcut and audio panel keys */
> > > - { KE_IGNORE, 0xe025, { KEY_RESERVED } },
> > > + { KE_KEY, 0xe025, { KEY_PROG4 } },
> > > { KE_IGNORE, 0xe026, { KEY_RESERVED } },
> > >
> > > { KE_IGNORE, 0xe02e, { KEY_VOLUMEDOWN } },
> > > @@ -235,6 +235,9 @@ static void dell_wmi_process_key(int reported_key)
> > > acpi_video_handles_brightness_key_presses())
> > > return;
> > >
> > > + if (key->keycode == KEY_PROG4 && !wmi_requires_smbios_request)
> > > + return;
> > > +
> >
> > Here I would rather test against reported_key, not keycode. If somebody
> > in future adds KEY_PROG4 for something else we will have problem...
>
> As 0xe025 is currently the only event we know about that should be
> ignored on some machines and processed on others, this makes sense, at
> least for now. If I change the first condition to:
>
> reported_key == 0xe025
>
> will you be okay with adding your Reviewed-by for this patch? Then, for
> Darren's convenience, I could post a v5 of the whole series with the
> above change and all your Acked-by and Reviewed-by tags added.
Yes, please do. That way I'm sure I have the right bits.
--
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
