lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] HID: input: map digitizer battery usage
On Mon, 31 Jul 2017, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> We already mapped battery strength reports from the generic device
> control page, but we did not update capacity from input reports, nor we
> mapped the battery strength report from the digitizer page, so let's
> implement this now.
>
> Batteries driven by the input reports will now start in "unknown" state,
> and will get updated once we receive first report containing battery
> strength from the device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
> ---
> drivers/hid/hid-input.c | 181 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> include/linux/hid.h | 2 +
> 2 files changed, 124 insertions(+), 59 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
> index ccdff1ee1f0c..5bcd4e4afb54 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-input.c
> @@ -340,13 +340,42 @@ static unsigned find_battery_quirk(struct hid_device *hdev)
> return quirks;
> }
>
> +static int hidinput_scale_battery_capacity(struct hid_device *dev,
> + int value)
> +{
> + if (dev->battery_min < dev->battery_max &&
> + value >= dev->battery_min && value <= dev->battery_max)
> + value = ((value - dev->battery_min) * 100) /
> + (dev->battery_max - dev->battery_min);
> +
> + return value;
> +}
> +
> +static int hidinput_query_battery_capacity(struct hid_device *dev)
> +{
> + u8 *buf;
> + int ret;
> +
> + buf = kmalloc(2, GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!buf)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> +
> + ret = hid_hw_raw_request(dev, dev->battery_report_id, buf, 2,
> + dev->battery_report_type, HID_REQ_GET_REPORT);
> + ret = (ret != 2) ? -ENODATA : buf[1];
> +
> + kfree(buf);
> +
> + return hidinput_scale_battery_capacity(dev, ret);

Is it intentional that you call hidinput_scale_battery_capacity() here
even in 'ret == -ENODATA' case?

It wouldn't actually break anything currently, as the

value >= dev->battery_min

check in hidinput_scale_battery_capacity() would most likely ensure that
the value wouldn't get overwritten and then propagated back, but it's
confusing and error-prone wrt. any future changes.
Or have I missed something?

Thanks,

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-01 16:36    [W:0.046 / U:2.360 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site