On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 1:02 PM Takashi Iwai <tiwai@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Nov 2018 03:57:48 +0100,
> Ayman Bagabas wrote:
> > + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(&inputdev->dev);
> > + args[0].type = args[1].type = args[2].type = ACPI_TYPE_INTEGER;
> > + args[1].integer.value = 0x04;
> > +
> > + if (acpi_has_method(handle, method = "\\_SB.PCI0.LPCB.EC0.SPIN")) {
>
> This looks ugly... And checkpatch also complains.
Good point.
Actually another question is what handle do we get here? Can we check
method name by relative path, i.e. "SPIN" / "WPIN" instead?
> > + args[0].integer.value = 0;
> > + args[2].integer.value = on ? 1 : 0;
> > + } else if (acpi_has_method(handle, method = "\\_SB.PCI0.LPCB.EC0.WPIN")) {
> > + args[0].integer.value = 1;
> > + args[2].integer.value = on ? 0 : 1;
> > + } else {
> > + dev_err(&inputdev->dev, "Unable to find ACPI method\n");
> > + return -ENOSYS;
> > + }
>
> Can these checks be done at initialization phase? It doesn't seem
> needed to be executed at each call.
Agree.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
