linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] dell-laptop: Fix keyboard led max_brightness property for Dell Latitude E6410

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]

Message-ID: <CAHp75VfPW88YhJR97POu08POP+Edw2dEm1gwfGMxddLeOydtgQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Oct 2017 22:09:41 +0300
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
Cc:     Matthew Garrett <mjg59@...f.ucam.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        "Gabriel M. Elder" <gabriel@...gnowsys.com>,
        Gabriele Mazzotta <gabriele.mzt@...il.com>,
        Mario Limonciello <Mario.Limonciello@...l.com>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] dell-laptop: Fix keyboard led max_brightness property
 for Dell Latitude E6410

On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 9:06 PM, Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com> wrote:
> This machine reports number of keyboard backlight led levels, instead of
> value of the last led level index. Therefore max_brightness properly needs
> to be subtracted by 1 to match led max_brightness API.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@...il.com>
> Reported-by: Gabriel M. Elder <gabriel@...gnowsys.com>
> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=196913

> +       u8 kbd_led_num_of_levels_instead_of_last_index;

Sorry for last minute review comments.

First of all, can it be just boolean?

Naming... Yes, too hard as always was, is and will be.

What about just

kbd_led_use_levels?

Also, does it make sense to create a quirks as an unsigned long and
put there corresponding bits with definitions?

/* Comment what is this for */
#define QUIRK_KBD_LED_USE_LEVELS   0

unsigned long quirks;

?

> +       if (quirks && quirks->kbd_led_num_of_levels_instead_of_last_index && info->levels)
> +               info->levels--;

With last suggestion if becomes something like

if (quirks & BIT(QUIRK_KBD_LED_USE_LEVELS) && info->levels)


-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko