lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
Subjectpanasonic-laptop driver oddity
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


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-15 16:51    [W:0.033 / U:0.400 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site