On Thu, Apr 05, 2012 at 12:00:46AM +0900, Akio Idehara wrote:
> @@ -485,10 +506,23 @@ static int get_lcd(struct backlight_device *bd)
> struct toshiba_acpi_dev *dev = bl_get_data(bd);
> u32 hci_result;
> u32 value;
> + bool enabled;
> + int extra = 0;
> +
> + if (dev->tr_backlight_supported) {
> + if (!get_tr_backlight_status(dev, &enabled)) {
> + if (!enabled)
> + extra = 1;
> + else
> + return 0;
> + } else {
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> + }
>
> hci_read1(dev, HCI_LCD_BRIGHTNESS, &value, &hci_result);
> if (hci_result == HCI_SUCCESS)
> - return (value >> HCI_LCD_BRIGHTNESS_SHIFT);
> + return (value >> HCI_LCD_BRIGHTNESS_SHIFT) + extra;
I'm still not crazy about the name. And really I think if
get_tr_backlight_status() is going to return an error code, when it
fails the return value should be propogated (even if it's the same in
this case). How about this?
bool enabled;
int ret;
int brightness = 0;
if (dev->tr_backlight_supported) {
ret = get_tr_backlight_status(dev, &enabled);
if (ret)
return ret;
if (enabled)
return 0;
brightness++;
}
hci_read1(dev, HCI_LCD_BRIGHTNESS, &value, &hci_result);
if (hci_result == HCI_SUCCESS)
return brightness + (value >> HCI_LCD_BRIGHTNESS_SHIFT);
> static const struct backlight_ops toshiba_backlight_data = {
> + .options = BL_CORE_SUSPENDRESUME,
What's the reason for adding this? I don't see that it's useful unless
we're handling BL_CORE_SUSPENDED, which toshiba_acpi is not doing.
Cheers,
Seth
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe platform-driver-x86"
in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
