[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <b9b98752-da3d-4cac-b010-fb13c90bb2f5@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 May 2023 09:08:49 -0400
From: "Mark Pearson" <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
To: "Hans de Goede" <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc: "markgross@...nel.org" <markgross@...nel.org>,
"platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org"
<platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/5] platform/x86: think-lmi: Enable opcode support on BIOS
settings
Hi Hans
On Tue, May 30, 2023, at 6:54 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi Mark,
>
> On 5/26/23 19:16, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> Whilst reviewing some documentation from the FW team on using WMI on
>> Lenovo system I noticed that we weren't using Opcode support when
>> changing BIOS settings in the thinkLMI driver.
>>
>> We should be doing this to ensure we're future proof as the old
>> non-opcode mechanism has been deprecated.
>>
>> Tested on X1 Carbon G10 and G11.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@...ebb.ca>
>
> Thank you for this new version. Please prepare a v4 addressing Ilpo's
> review remarks.
Will do
>
> About the aligning function arguments on the next line to the '('
> of the function call start at the previous line, checkpatch also
> checks for this.
>
> It is always a good idea to run checkpatch before submitting patches.
I always do - and checkpatch isn't complaining about the alignment here.
Mark
Powered by blists - more mailing lists