On Thu, Jun 23, 2016 at 07:57:24PM +0200, Matej Groma wrote: > > > Thank you for your review. If you want me to, I can also add a check based on > > > a presence of eco button and join it with AND or OR. The patch should not > > > introduce a regression because the firmware consistently returns > > > UNSUPPORTED_CMD when queried about unknown leds. > > > > An additional AND check based on this sounds like a good idea since it > > provides another level of confidence that the LED concerned really is an Eco > > LED. It is also straight forward to do. If the machine does not have an > > Eco button then it's highly unlikely that it would have an Eco LED. > > I failed to identify the bit indicating presence of eco button. I guess > there is a difference between the old 4-key security pads (some of them > have a key mapped to eco mode and I have no idea whether that counts as > presence) and the other ones. That is unfortunate and does indeed make a check based on this awkward. > For the time being I suggest keeping the patch as it is, also the last > check should be itself sufficient. In the circumstances I agree. Let's run with the current patch as is and see what happens. Regards jonathan -- 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
