Re: [PATCH v2 15/24] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Do not send ACPI netlink events for unknown hotkeys

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 24 Apr 2024, Hans de Goede wrote:

> Do not send ACPI netlink events for unknown hotkeys, to avoid userspace
> starting to rely on them. Instead these should be added to the keymap to
> send evdev events.
> 
> This should not cause a behavior change for existing laptop models since
> all currently known 0x1xxx events have a mapping.
> 
> In hindsight the ACPI netlink events should have been suppressed for
> the adaptive keyboard and extended hotkeys events too. But the kernel has
> been sending ACPI netlink events for those for a long time now, so we
> cannot just stop sending them without potentially causing issues for
> existing users who may depend on these.
> 
> Tested-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 14 +++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> index 9b38770412ab..952bac635a18 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
> @@ -2250,7 +2250,7 @@ static void tpacpi_input_send_tabletsw(void)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -static bool tpacpi_input_send_key(const u32 hkey)
> +static bool tpacpi_input_send_key(const u32 hkey, bool *send_acpi_ev)
>  {
>  	unsigned int keycode, scancode;
>  
> @@ -2271,6 +2271,14 @@ static bool tpacpi_input_send_key(const u32 hkey)
>  		scancode = hkey - TP_HKEY_EV_EXTENDED_KEY_START +
>  			   TP_ACPI_HOTKEYSCAN_EXTENDED_START;
>  	} else {
> +		/*
> +		 * Do not send ACPI netlink events for unknown hotkeys, to
> +		 * avoid userspace starting to rely on them. Instead these
> +		 * should be added to the keymap to send evdev events.
> +		 */
> +		if (send_acpi_ev)
> +			*send_acpi_ev = false;

Hi,

I'd consider dropping the check and passing a pointer to dummy variable 
instead of NULL, and comment at the caller defining the dummy variable why 
the value is getting ignored. But you know this code better than me so I 
leave it up to you what you want to do.

> +
>  		return false;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -2298,7 +2306,7 @@ static struct tp_acpi_drv_struct ibm_hotkey_acpidriver;
>  /* Do NOT call without validating scancode first */
>  static void tpacpi_hotkey_send_key(unsigned int scancode)
>  {
> -	tpacpi_input_send_key(TP_HKEY_EV_ORIG_KEY_START + scancode);
> +	tpacpi_input_send_key(TP_HKEY_EV_ORIG_KEY_START + scancode, NULL);
>  }


-- 
 i.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux