On Thu, Oct 05, 2017 at 09:19:23PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not
> > as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too.
> >
> > This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices.
> >
> > This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to
> > ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the
> > spurious key-presses on these other devices.
>
> Thanks!
>
> One comment though.
>
> > static void __exit peaq_wmi_exit(void)
> > {
> > + if (!dmi_check_system(peaq_dmi_table))
> > + return;
> > +
> > if (!wmi_has_guid(PEAQ_DOLBY_BUTTON_GUID))
> > return;
>
> I was thinking, after got kbuid bot complains on Kai's patch on
> sections mismatch, do we need these checks at all?
> How would be possible to get a module loaded in the first place if
> system is not in whitelist?
>
I was wondering this myself.
--
Darren Hart
VMware Open Source Technology Center