On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 03:33:01PM +0800, Alex Hung wrote:
> New firmwares include a feature called 5 button array that supports
> super key, volume up/down, rotation lock and power button. Especially,
> support for this feature is required to fix power button on some recent
> systems.
>
> This patch was tested on a Dell Latitude 7280.
Hi Alex,
Minor nit below (no need to resend, but a pair of follow-up cleanups would be
nice).
Queued to testing.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alex Hung <alex.hung@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Pali, would you care to offer a review or some testing to verify no unexpected
conflicts with the other dell drivers?
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/intel-hid.c | 107 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 102 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel-hid.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel-hid.c
> index cb3ab2b..6e796a5 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel-hid.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel-hid.c
> @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
> /*
> - * Intel HID event driver for Windows 8
> + * Intel HID event & 5 button array driver
> *
> * Copyright (C) 2015 Alex Hung <alex.hung@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> * Copyright (C) 2015 Andrew Lutomirski <luto@xxxxxxxxxx>
> @@ -57,8 +57,24 @@ static const struct key_entry intel_hid_keymap[] = {
> { KE_END },
> };
>
> +/* 5 button array notification value. */
> +static const struct key_entry intel_array_keymap[] = {
> + { KE_KEY, 0xC2, { KEY_LEFTMETA} }, /* Press */
> + { KE_IGNORE, 0xC3, { KEY_LEFTMETA} }, /* Release */
> + { KE_KEY, 0xC4, { KEY_VOLUMEUP} }, /* Press */
> + { KE_IGNORE, 0xC5, { KEY_VOLUMEUP} }, /* Release */
> + { KE_KEY, 0xC6, { KEY_VOLUMEDOWN} }, /* Press */
> + { KE_IGNORE, 0xC7, { KEY_VOLUMEDOWN} }, /* Release */
> + { KE_SW, 0xC8, { .sw = {SW_ROTATE_LOCK, 1} } }, /* Press */
> + { KE_SW, 0xC9, { .sw = {SW_ROTATE_LOCK, 0} } }, /* Release */
> + { KE_KEY, 0xCE, { KEY_POWER} }, /* Press */
> + { KE_IGNORE, 0xCF, { KEY_POWER} }, /* Release */
> + { KE_END },
> +};
> +
> struct intel_hid_priv {
> struct input_dev *input_dev;
> + struct input_dev *array;
> };
>
> static int intel_hid_set_enable(struct device *device, int enable)
> @@ -78,15 +94,43 @@ static int intel_hid_set_enable(struct device *device, int enable)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void intel_button_array_enable(struct device *device, int enable)
> +{
As enable is always explicitly passed and is used solely as a boolean value, it
would preferable for both this and the previous usage above to define it as a
bool. Being self-consistent is important however, so please consider this for a
cleanup as a separate patch.
> + struct intel_hid_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(device);
> + acpi_handle handle = ACPI_HANDLE(device);
> + unsigned long long button_cap;
> + acpi_status status;
> +
> + if (!priv->array)
> + return;
> +
> + /* Query supported platform features */
> + status = acpi_evaluate_integer(handle, "BTNC", NULL, &button_cap);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> + dev_warn(device, "failed to get button capability\n");
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + /* Enable|disable features - power button is always enabled */
> + status = acpi_execute_simple_method(handle, "BTNE",
> + enable ? button_cap : 1);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status))
> + dev_warn(device, "failed to set button capability\n");
> +}
> +
> static int intel_hid_pl_suspend_handler(struct device *device)
> {
> intel_hid_set_enable(device, 0);
> + intel_button_array_enable(device, 0);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> static int intel_hid_pl_resume_handler(struct device *device)
> {
> intel_hid_set_enable(device, 1);
> + intel_button_array_enable(device, 1);
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -126,11 +170,43 @@ static int intel_hid_input_setup(struct platform_device *device)
> return ret;
> }
>
> +static int intel_button_array_input_setup(struct platform_device *device)
> +{
> + struct intel_hid_priv *priv = dev_get_drvdata(&device->dev);
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* Setup input device for 5 button array */
> + priv->array = input_allocate_device();
> + if (!priv->array)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ret = sparse_keymap_setup(priv->array, intel_array_keymap, NULL);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_free_array_device;
> +
> + priv->array->dev.parent = &device->dev;
> + priv->array->name = "Intel HID 5 button array";
> + priv->array->id.bustype = BUS_HOST;
> +
> + ret = input_register_device(priv->array);
> + if (ret)
> + goto err_free_array_device;
> +
> + return 0;
> +
> +err_free_array_device:
> + input_free_device(priv->array);
> + return ret;
This return path is more complex than it could be, since you test for ret before
return anyway:
out:
if (ret)
input_free_device(priv->array);
return ret;
There is no need for a second return point that I can see. Same for the
hid_input_setup function. We can remove 8 lines.
This follows the previous nit - it's self consistent, but a follow-on cleanup
patch would be worthwhile.
Thanks Alex, I've queued this to testing and it will go to for-next unless the
CI, Pali, or a user reports a problem. Appreciate all your effort on this one.
--
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
