Sorry, late to the party.
On Fri, Sep 08, 2017 at 10:23:11AM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
> + mode = hex_to_bin(buf[0]);
> + if (mode == 0 || mode == 1) {
> + status = wmi_evaluate_method(INTEL_WMI_THUNDERBOLT_GUID, 0, 1,
> + &input, NULL);
> + if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
> + pr_err("intel-wmi-thunderbolt: failed setting %s\n",
> + buf);
> + return -ENODEV;
> + }
> + } else {
> + pr_err("intel-wmi-thunderbolt: unsupported mode: %d", mode);
> + }
> + return count;
> +}
Seems odd to allow user space to fill the log by writing invalid data
to sysfs, likewise that success is returned in the else case.
I'd drop both pr_err() and return -EINVAL in the else case.
> +static const struct wmi_device_id intel_wmi_thunderbolt_id_table[] = {
> + { .guid_string = INTEL_WMI_THUNDERBOLT_GUID },
> + { },
> +};
I'm not familiar with WMI, but don't you need a MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE here?
How does user space know which module to load upon receiving the uevent?
Thanks,
Lukas
