2023-12-12 18:21:05

by Guy Chronister

Subject: [PATCH] HID: google_hammer: Fix invalid ENOSYS warning and unsigned.

Fixed warnings about ENOSYS and bare unsigned without int.

Signed-off-by: Guy Chronister <[email protected]>
---
drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c b/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
index c6bdb9c4ef3e..d567f020bead 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
@@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int hammer_kbd_brightness_set_blocking(struct led_classdev *cdev,
}

ret = hid_hw_output_report(led->hdev, led->buf, sizeof(led->buf));
- if (ret == -ENOSYS)
+ if (ret == -EINVAL)
ret = hid_hw_raw_request(led->hdev, 0, led->buf,
sizeof(led->buf),
HID_OUTPUT_REPORT,
@@ -420,7 +420,7 @@ static int hammer_event(struct hid_device *hid, struct hid_field *field,
}

static bool hammer_has_usage(struct hid_device *hdev, unsigned int report_type,
- unsigned application, unsigned usage)
+ unsigned int application, unsigned int usage)
{
struct hid_report_enum *re = &hdev->report_enum[report_type];
struct hid_report *report;
--
2.40.1

2023-12-18 10:06:21

by Jiri Kosina

Subject: Re: [PATCH] HID: google_hammer: Fix invalid ENOSYS warning and unsigned.

On Tue, 12 Dec 2023, Guy Chronister wrote:

> Fixed warnings about ENOSYS and bare unsigned without int.
>
> Signed-off-by: Guy Chronister <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c b/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
> index c6bdb9c4ef3e..d567f020bead 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-google-hammer.c
> @@ -324,7 +324,7 @@ static int hammer_kbd_brightness_set_blocking(struct led_classdev *cdev,
> }
>
> ret = hid_hw_output_report(led->hdev, led->buf, sizeof(led->buf));
> - if (ret == -ENOSYS)
> + if (ret == -EINVAL)
> ret = hid_hw_raw_request(led->hdev, 0, led->buf,
> sizeof(led->buf),
> HID_OUTPUT_REPORT,

Could you please elaborate why this is funcionally correct thing to do?
How are you now handling the special case when
hdev->ll_driver->output_report() callback doesn't exist for the specific
low-level driver?

--
Jiri Kosina
SUSE Labs