On Sat, Apr 01, 2017 at 01:00:23PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 01:22:02PM +0200, Micha?? K??pie?? wrote:
> > > @@ -1098,14 +1075,8 @@ static void acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify(struct
> > > acpi_device *device, u32 event)
> > > * handled in software; its state is queried using FUNC_FLAGS
> > > */
> > > if ((fujitsu_laptop->flags_supported & BIT(26)) &&
> > > - (call_fext_func(FUNC_FLAGS, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0) & BIT(26))) {
> > > - keycode = KEY_TOUCHPAD_TOGGLE;
> > > - input_report_key(input, keycode, 1);
> > > - input_sync(input);
> > > - input_report_key(input, keycode, 0);
> > > - input_sync(input);
> > > - }
> > > -
> > > + (call_fext_func(FLAG_RFKILL, 0x1, 0x0, 0x0) & BIT(26)))
> > > + sparse_keymap_report_event(input, BIT(26), 1, true);
> >
> > I have only just now noticed that a typo crept in here, causing a bug.
> > The original call to call_fext_func() passed FUNC_FLAGS as the first
> > argument while the added one uses FLAG_RFKILL instead. This is wrong as
> > call_fext_func() arguments should be left intact by this patch.
> >
> > Darren, could you please amend this in testing? The call_fext_func()
> > call added by the above patch chunk should pass FUNC_FLAGS as the first
> > argument, not FLAG_RFKILL.
> >
> > Thanks and sorry for the trouble.
>
> Gah, I didn't catch that either :(
And I missed it too. :-( Thanks for catching this Michael. The reason it
never showed up in my testing is that my Fujitsu hardware doesn't have the
feature which exercises this code branch.
> I've updated this patch with:
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c
> b/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c
> index 52d6d21..f66da4b 100644
Thanks Darren.
Regards
jonathan
