linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [v2] surface pro 3: Add support driver for Surface Pro 3 buttons

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 10 Aug 2015 19:45:24 -0700
From:	Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>
To:	"Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
Cc:	"joe@...ches.com" <joe@...ches.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	"jslaby@...e.com" <jslaby@...e.com>,
	"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org" 
	<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
	"akpm@...ux-foundation.org" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	"Wysocki, Rafael J" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	"Westerberg, Mika" <mika.westerberg@...el.com>,
	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"mchehab@....samsung.com" <mchehab@....samsung.com>,
	"arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [v2] surface pro 3: Add support driver for Surface Pro 3
 buttons

On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 08:48:18AM +0000, Chen, Yu C wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 01:27 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > On Fri, 2015-08-07 at 15:57 +0800, Chen Yu wrote:					\
> > > +	ret;							\
> > > +})
> > 
> > This seems a bit complicated.
> > 
> > The else ret = 0 isn't necessary as it's initialized to 0.
> > bool might be better than int.
> > 
> Got.
> > > +static void surface_button_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
> > > +{
> > > +	struct surface_button *button = acpi_driver_data(device);
> > > +	struct input_dev *input;
> > > +	int key_code = KEY_RESERVED;
> > > +	bool pressed = false;
> > > +
> > > +	if (!handle_surface_button_notify(POWER, KEY_POWER) &&
> > > +		!handle_surface_button_notify(HOME, KEY_LEFTMETA) &&
> > > +		!handle_surface_button_notify(VOLUME_UP, KEY_VOLUMEUP) &&
> > > +		!handle_surface_button_notify(VOLUME_DOWN, KEY_VOLUMEDOWN))
> > > +		dev_info_ratelimited(&device->dev,
> > > +			"Unsupported event [0x%x]\n", event);
> > 
> > Some might prefer alignment to the open parenthesis:
> > 
> > 	if (!handle_surface_button_notify(POWER, KEY_POWER) &&
> > 	    !handle_surface_button_notify(HOME, KEY_LEFTMETA) &&
> > 	    !handle_surface_button_notify(VOLUME_UP, KEY_VOLUMEUP) &&
> > 	    !handle_surface_button_notify(VOLUME_DOWN, KEY_VOLUMEDOWN))
> > 
> > I think the older switch/case was easier to understand.
> > 
> OK, then let's keep the switch/case.
> thanks.

Agreed.


-- 
Darren Hart
Intel Open Source Technology Center
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/