Hi, I think something may be slightly broken. I got the below email twice, once in reply to where it should be, once as a reply to the cover letter. Best regards, Arvid On 2022-09-27 15:49, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi, > > On 9/25/22 20:19, Arvid Norlander wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Thank you, I have incorperated your feedback in my local branch. >> >> On 2022-09-23 21:24, Barnabás Pőcze wrote: >>> Hi >>> >>> 2022. szeptember 22., csütörtök 20:24 keltezéssel, Arvid Norlander írta: >>> >>>> This is loosely based on a previous staging driver that was removed. See >>>> links below for more info on that driver. The original commit ID was >>>> 0be013e3dc2ee79ffab8a438bbb4e216837e3d52. >>>> >>>> However, here a completely different approach is taken to the user space >>>> API (which should solve the issues the original driver had). Each PNP0C32 >>>> device is a button, and each such button gets a separate input device >>>> associated with it (instead of a shared platform input device). >>>> >>>> The button ID (as read from ACPI method GHID) is provided via a sysfs file >>>> "button_id". >>>> >>>> If the button caused a wakeup it will "latch" the "wakeup_cause" sysfs file >>>> to true. This can be reset by a user space process. >>>> >>>> Link: https://marc.info/?l=linux-acpi&m=120550727131007 >>>> Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/5/28/327 >>>> Signed-off-by: Arvid Norlander <lkml@xxxxxxxxx> >>>> --- >>>> [...] >>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c b/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c >>>> new file mode 100644 >>>> index 000000000000..ce51abe012f7 >>>> --- /dev/null >>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/quickstart.c >>>> @@ -0,0 +1,320 @@ >> >> <snip> >> >>>> + >>>> +static ssize_t wakeup_cause_store(struct device *dev, >>>> + struct device_attribute *attr, >>>> + const char *buf, size_t count) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct quickstart_acpi *quickstart = dev_get_drvdata(dev); >>>> + >>>> + if (count < 2) >>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>> + >>>> + if (strncasecmp(buf, "false", 4) != 0) >>>> + return -EINVAL; >>>> + >>> >>> If "true"/"false" will be used in the final version, then I think this check >>> currently is too lax. You could use `sysfs_streq()`. And I think the `count < 2` >>> check is not needed. >> >> Regarding the user space API I don't know, that is one of the open >> questions in the cover letter. I have yet to get any feedback on any of >> those questions. That is something that needs to happen before this driver >> can be included. I would appreciate your feedback on those. > > I will reply to this question in my general review of the driver. > > Regards, > > Hans > > > >> >> <snip> >> >>> >>> Regards, >>> Barnabás Pőcze >> >> Regards, >> Arvid Norlander >> >
