Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Remove unreachable code in beep_read()

["Mark Pearson" <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>]

On Wed, Sep 9, 2026, at 12:49 PM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 11:26:18AM -0400, Mark Pearson wrote:
>> Hi Thorsten,
>> 
>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026, at 5:01 AM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>> > The procfs entry /proc/acpi/ibm/beep is only created if beep_init()
>> > succeeds, which requires beep_handle to be non-NULL. Remove the
>> > unreachable code branch from beep_read().
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <blum@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c | 8 ++------
>> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c 
>> > b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> > index 1082c36ae723..069c9f1c359f 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
>> > @@ -5936,12 +5936,8 @@ static int __init beep_init(struct 
>> > ibm_init_struct *iibm)
>> > 
>> >  static int beep_read(struct seq_file *m)
>> >  {
>> > -	if (!beep_handle)
>> > -		seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tnot supported\n");
>> > -	else {
>> > -		seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tsupported\n");
>> > -		seq_puts(m, "commands:\t<cmd> (<cmd> is 0-17)\n");
>> > -	}
>> > +	seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tsupported\n");
>> > +	seq_puts(m, "commands:\t<cmd> (<cmd> is 0-17)\n");
>> > 
>> >  	return 0;
>> >  }
>> 
>> Change looks good to me.
>> I guess the beep_write could be similarly updated?
>
> No, beep_write() can be called via the beep= module parameter even if
> beep_init() failed, so that check is still needed.
>

Oh - good point, I had missed that.
With that noted:
Reviewed-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@squebb.ca>

Thanks
Mark