linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] x86: add support for Huawei WMI hotkeys.

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, 3 Dec 2018 16:23:46 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:     Ayman Bagabas <ayman.bagabas@...il.com>,
        ALSA Development Mailing List <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
        Hui Wang <hui.wang@...onical.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy@...radead.org>,
        Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Kailang Yang <kailang@...ltek.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Platform Driver <platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/3] x86: add support for Huawei WMI hotkeys.

On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 4:22 PM Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
> On Mon, 03 Dec 2018 15:18:54 +0100,
> Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Dec 3, 2018 at 2:00 PM Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:57:37 +0100,
> > > Ayman Bagabas wrote:
> >
> > > > +struct huawei_wmi_priv {
> > > > +     struct input_dev *idev;
> > > > +     struct led_classdev cdev;
> > > > +     acpi_handle handle;
> > >
> > > Is this handle set in anywhere?  I couldn't see it in your patch.
> > > If it's supposed to be NULL, passing NULL explicitly makes your
> > > intention clearer.
> >
> > Isn't below an answer?
> >
> > > > +     // Skip registering LED subsystem if no ACPI method was found.
> > > > +     status = acpi_get_handle(priv->handle, "\\_SB.PCI0.LPCB.EC0", &priv->handle);
>
> Oh indeed, but why it passes priv->handle at the first argument...?

Yes, since it's an absolute, I guess NULL in this case will be OK.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko