Hi, On 5/24/21 12:19 PM, Ksr, Prasanth wrote: > Hi, > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> >> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2021 10:25 PM >> To: Mark Pearson >> Cc: mgross@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Bharathi, >> Divya; Ksr, Prasanth; Dell Client Kernel >> Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] platform/x86: think-lmi: Add WMI >> interface support on Lenovo platforms >> >> >> [EXTERNAL EMAIL] >> >> Hi, >> >> On 5/21/21 5:55 PM, Mark Pearson wrote: >> >> <snip> >> >>>>> I know it would make Dell and Lenovo operate differently (I can add >>>>> that detail to the documentation) but it just feels like a nicer >>>>> design. >>>> >>>> That works for me. Perhaps you can also do a (compile tested only) >>>> RFC patch for the Dell code to do the same thing (replace the memset >>>> 0 with the strscpy) to see if the Dell folks are ok with also doing >>>> things this way ? >>>> >>> I'm not hugely comfortable with that. If for some reason it broke >>> things for Dell customers I wouldn't want to be responsible :) >> >> Right, that is why I suggested making it a RFC patch and I would certainly not >> apply that patch without it being tested by Dell first. >> >> The idea behind the patch is for it to be a way to get a discussion about this >> started. In my experience patches tend to get more of a reaction then >> hypothetical discussions about changes :) >> >>> I'd rather they >>> made the changes and were able to test it - I know that's what I'd >>> prefer if it was the other way around. Apologies if I'm being over cautious! >> >> If you don't feel comfortable doing this, that is fine, lets wait what the Dell >> folks have to say; and if they don't respond I might do a RFC myself. >> > > Ack. We will implement the same from Dell side as well to have uniformity and > seems nicer from a user point of view rather than populating the > current_password field again in case of password change scenario. Great, thank you. Regards, Hans
