On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 10:06:34PM +0930, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > Hi Darren > > On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 08:22:58PM +0930, Jonathan Woithe wrote: > > On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 07:30:20PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote: > > > Jonathan, Micha??, > > > > > > Where are we with this? The above reads as "Doesn't appear to break existing > > > systems on hand". Jonathan, are you happy with this patch? > > > > Sorry, I got caught up over the last couple of weeks with other tasks and > > have not yet managed to confirm the lack of regressions on the S7020. It > > was on my list for this coming week though. My comments quoted above were > > theoretical rather than based on an actual test. The patch appears fairly > > innoculous given that BTNI bit 24 is not set on the S7020 but for > > completeness I would prefer to give it a run on the S7020 before we merge > > the patch. I will make an effort to fit this in over the next couple of > > days. > > I have now tested the patch on the S7020 and unsurprisingly I have not > observed any regressions. I'm therefore happy to take the patch more or > less as is. However, I would like to see a brief comment in > acpi_fujitsu_hotkey_add() about the use of bit 24 in BTNI to determine > whether the LED handler should be registered since the reasoning is not > obvious and is not evident from the code. A copy of the original patch with > such a comment inserted (no code changes) is below. > > Signed-off-by: MichaÅ? KÄ?pieÅ? <kernel@xxxxxxxxxx> Jonathan, please check your character set, a few mangled characters here which I have to fix up to use. UTF-8 seems to work reliably. Your headers currently include: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > Acked-by: Jonathan Woithe <jwoithe@xxxxxxxxxx> > > MichaÅ? hasn't indicated that a revised patch is in the works so I'm fine if > you proceed with the one below. I've selected the relevant parts of his > preamble for inclusion in the commit message, but feel free to edit further > to your taste. > Yeah, tough call, some guess work involved here, and where we are uncertain, we should document it. I don't think we need to include bits about uncertain future plans or speculation on how things might be done. Keep it to what this patch does and any qualifiers a developer should be aware of. I've made a couple cosmetic changes and queued to for-next. Please review and let me know if you have any concerns. -- 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
