From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB65CC433F5 for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:13:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A00A16103C for ; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 09:13:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S241292AbhKIJQJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 04:16:09 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:41160 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237882AbhKIJQG (ORCPT ); Tue, 9 Nov 2021 04:16:06 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-x52e.google.com (mail-ed1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B5C36C061766; Tue, 9 Nov 2021 01:13:20 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ed1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id j21so73717680edt.11; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 01:13:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=7fvpt7bkP+uxAmgEvC006y7WNF/VjJWaX7lBZ4rVieU=; b=l07gsYTHDpcXom+Mpz+0McxPAljXjZ+IuiwP2OKDg5gkCPo95DDtQXoAJ0g7KwDEFM +edW6xxEv8NLF3jZ/ZNYIDOln6HSWQDw6wPwZh/vlSkpL7gAO3m41kWdPqCu9AeEW6AP AxdbOCepi9Fjzeft7Mr8UaAaRXhsUvIEG2fn1KPyK5AIB3pa03srUPmxcxspysYh7WSy QU+Zgc4Kbnqtaij1YeI2Ov6XfUfosihc4CrP7bqJVwqMaCWPP4OIKEzy52JuYMJOHZjn 93tkn8JPK9h6AIH2tOoqg83l8GEB0bVZhDjjZl8YIQ6+5B5tbaeyq+CgBBv+Fk0zG1Ae SbLg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=7fvpt7bkP+uxAmgEvC006y7WNF/VjJWaX7lBZ4rVieU=; b=e5uEpV6JU7ZYs4M5bej608IFxADhu3UxDSVV06k9i1G8dMLtx94kG7UzsOfqHm6ljn bqrzm/6+fDp+ZoZ4JrIHwRpVfViTai8+jsEQPhA2vEh90+HK62kwFpeVTBz3WVygdQBl 1Scx/H6ndFxrVKpU6tJA0gdYtW1Ywo4fL6Ig/3R+PhkkiJ9mZq0KBB2tY+POcbT3Tf0L d1oN9fDOME7/28Z8E/nW5B0jP8qJCu7L3D1Su86nh23cOOVn9j+mumaSEQS7qgoGN9ky dGtbgXnbqH6tc3nQDnox9sL4FX2TMB7Zc/jEoJCj6tPOZuDpcOiC+RGwulWK+BtQgxke hKPA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531Nb01rTickS9Dc2DGMqF5pScE3c9uxV4mXfAp30cGdN0DGG3h/ pwyrh0J4oKpw1guBVUOgCepZ3Eyu2CLbEFUVEoY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJy2NG9TqRFnNV3SUetYoAPoeDCVudyp7SZz0z8KaYicVA4Fj0EI+TiAbUWUYAQGjbpPquMr3e13w0rq5hje9lI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:207c:: with SMTP id bd28mr8154843edb.240.1636449199301; Tue, 09 Nov 2021 01:13:19 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211109081125.41410-1-nakato@nakato.io> <20211109081125.41410-2-nakato@nakato.io> In-Reply-To: <20211109081125.41410-2-nakato@nakato.io> From: Andy Shevchenko Date: Tue, 9 Nov 2021 11:12:34 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] platform/surface: surfacepro3_button: don't load on amd variant To: Sachi King Cc: Chen Yu , Hans de Goede , Mark Gross , Maximilian Luz , Dmitry Torokhov , Platform Driver , Linux Kernel Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 10:11 AM Sachi King wrote: > > The AMD variant of the Surface Laptop report 0 for their OEM platform > revision. The Surface devices that require the surfacepro3_button > driver do not have the _DSM that gets the OEM platform revision. If the > method does not exist, load surfacepro3_button. ... > * Surface Pro 4 and Surface Book 2 / Surface Pro 2017 use the same device > * ID (MSHW0040) for the power/volume buttons. Make sure this is the right > - * device by checking for the _DSM method and OEM Platform Revision. > + * device by checking for the _DSM method and OEM Platform Revision DSM > + * function. Not sure what this change means (not a native speaker). ... > - dev_dbg(&dev->dev, "OEM Platform Revision %llu\n", oem_platform_rev); I think this is useful to have. What about leaving it as is for debugging purposes and just replacing the last test? ... > + // make sure that OEM platform revision DSM call does not exist Please, fix the comment style while at it. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko