* panasonic-laptop driver oddity
@ 2009-01-15 15:47 Andy Whitcroft
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Andy Whitcroft @ 2009-01-15 15:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Harald Welte; +Cc: linux-kernel
We have been looking at your panasonic-laptop driver with a view to
back porting it to 2.6.27, and the following inconsistancy was pointed
out to me. In bl_set_status() we ensure that bright is no lower than
sinf[SINF_AC_MIN_BRIGHT] and sinf[SINF_DC_MIN_BRIGHT], and then check if
it is lower than sinf[SINF_AC_MIN_BRIGHT]. That seems redundant.
static int bl_set_status(struct backlight_device *bd)
{
struct pcc_acpi *pcc = bl_get_data(bd);
int bright = bd->props.brightness;
int rc;
if (!acpi_pcc_retrieve_biosdata(pcc, pcc->sinf))
return -EIO;
if (bright < pcc->sinf[SINF_AC_MIN_BRIGHT])
bright = pcc->sinf[SINF_AC_MIN_BRIGHT];
if (bright < pcc->sinf[SINF_DC_MIN_BRIGHT])
bright = pcc->sinf[SINF_DC_MIN_BRIGHT];
if (bright < pcc->sinf[SINF_AC_MIN_BRIGHT] ||
bright > pcc->sinf[SINF_AC_MAX_BRIGHT])
return -EINVAL;
We could not decide if this was simply belt and braces to constrain the
value, or if this should be a check against sinf[SINF_DC_MAX_BRIGHT].
Perhaps you could clarify?
-apw
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2009-01-15 15:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-01-15 15:47 panasonic-laptop driver oddity Andy Whitcroft
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome