> On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 09:33:16 +0100,
> Jackie Dong wrote:
>>
>> --- a/sound/pci/hda/patch_realtek.c
>> +++ b/sound/pci/hda/patch_realtek.c
>> @@ -6934,6 +6934,16 @@ static void alc_fixup_thinkpad_acpi(struct hda_codec *codec,
>> hda_fixup_thinkpad_acpi(codec, fix, action);
>> }
>>
>> +/* for hda_fixup_ideapad_acpi() */
>> +#include "ideapad_hotkey_led_helper.c"
>> +
>> +static void alc_fixup_ideapad_acpi(struct hda_codec *codec,
>> + const struct hda_fixup *fix, int action)
>> +{
>> + alc_fixup_no_shutup(codec, fix, action); /* reduce click noise */
>> + hda_fixup_ideapad_acpi(codec, fix, action);
>> +}
>
> So this unconditionally call alc_fixup_no_shutup(), and this > introduces another behavior to the existing entry -- i.e. there is a > chance of breakage.
>
> If we want to be very conservative, this call should be limited to > Ideapad.
> For alc_fixup_no_shutup(codec, fix, action),
I want to keep same behavior with alc_fixup_thinkpad_apci() and alc_fixup_idea_acpi() for one sound card. So, I add alc_fixup_no_shutup() in alc_fixup_ideapad_acpi().
----------Related source code of patch_reatek.c are FYR as below.
static void alc_fixup_thinkpad_acpi(struct hda_codec *codec,
const struct hda_fixup *fix, int
action)
{
alc_fixup_no_shutup(codec, fix, action); /* reduce click noise */
hda_fixup_thinkpad_acpi(codec, fix, action); }
/* for hda_fixup_ideapad_acpi() */
#include "ideapad_hotkey_led_helper.c"
static void alc_fixup_ideapad_acpi(struct hda_codec *codec,
const struct hda_fixup *fix, int action) {
alc_fixup_no_shutup(codec, fix, action); /* reduce click noise */
hda_fixup_ideapad_acpi(codec, fix, action);
}
Thanks,
Jackie
> thanks,
>
> Takashi
>
