On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 10:23 PM <Mario.Limonciello@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Y Paritcher <y.linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 12:57 PM > > To: Pali Rohár > > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > > Matthew Garrett; Limonciello, Mario > > Subject: [PATCH v4 0/3] platform/x86: dell-wmi: new keys > > > > > > [EXTERNAL EMAIL] > > > > change since v3: > > No code changes. > > Update commit message to reflect info given by Mario at dell. > > > > Is there anything more i have to do for the patches that were reviewed > > or will they be picked up by the maintainers? > > Thanks > > > > Y Paritcher (3): > > platform/x86: dell-wmi: add new backlight events > > platform/x86: dell-wmi: add new keymap type 0x0012 > > platform/x86: dell-wmi: add new dmi mapping for keycode 0xffff > > > > drivers/platform/x86/dell-wmi.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > > 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.27.0 > > Andy, > > The whole series looks good to me now. You can put this on the patches > when they're swooped up. > > Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxxx> > > However I would like to note there was a comment that you had a direct question > asked by Pali that probably got lost in the thread. This was on patch 3/3 on v3. > I think it's worth answering as it could dictate a follow up patch to change behavior. > > The summary of my argument which led to his is nested somewhere in the thread was that > to most users this isn't useful since they can't act on it. IE they can't use something > like setkeycodes and go on their merry way. The user who could act on it by coming > to upstream and submitting questions and patches is more technical and having them > use dyndbg to turn on the messages about unknown shouldn't be a big deal. > > > I'm not sure, but I thought that > > throwing warning or info message is the correct solution. Driver cannot > > handle something, so it inform about it, instead of silently dropping > > event. Same behavior I'm seeing in other kernel drivers. > > > But looks like that you and Mario have opposite opinion, that kernel > > should not log unknown events and rather should drop them. > > > I would like to have behavior of dell-wmi same as in other drivers for > > consistency, so the best would be to ask WMI/platform maintainers. They > > could have opinion how to handle these problem globally. > > > ... > > > Darren & Andy, could you please say something to this, what do you think > > about silently dropping events/actions which are currently unknown for > > dell-wmi driver? It is better to log them or not? Currently we are > > logging them. > > Can you please advise which way you would rather have the subsystem go? Seems Pali is okay with this version, so everything is settled I suppose. I will add it to my queue, thanks! -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
