Hi Hans,

On 2021-11-16 11:58+0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Thank you for working on this!

Thanks for the review!

> On 11/13/21 11:42, Thomas Weißschuh wrote:
> > @@ -9673,6 +9711,11 @@ static ssize_t charge_behaviour_show(struct device 
> > *dev,
> >                     return -ENODEV;
> >             if (ret)
> >                     active = POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_FORCE_DISCHARGE;
> > +   } else if (available & 
> > BIT(POWER_SUPPLY_CHARGE_BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE)) {
> 
> The use of else-if here seems wrong, this suggests that batterys can never
> support both force-discharge and inhibit-charge behavior, which they can, so 
> this
> means that active can now never get set to BEHAVIOUR_INHIBIT_CHARGE on
> batteries which support both.
> 
> So AFAICT the else part of the else if should be dropped here, making this
> a new stand alone if block.

Indeed, I'll fix this logic for v2.

Thanks,
Thomas


_______________________________________________
ibm-acpi-devel mailing list
ibm-acpi-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ibm-acpi-devel

Reply via email to