Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753706AbdFMQuA (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:50:00 -0400 Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([65.50.211.133]:33774 "EHLO bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751802AbdFMQt6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Jun 2017 12:49:58 -0400 Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2017 09:49:51 -0700 From: Darren Hart To: Pali =?iso-8859-1?Q?Roh=E1r?= Cc: Andy Shevchenko , Andy Lutomirski , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] RFC: platform/x86: wmi: Fix check for method instance number Message-ID: <20170613164951.GI27850@fury> References: <1495886134-8276-1-git-send-email-pali.rohar@gmail.com> <201706102115.57995@pali> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <201706102115.57995@pali> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1404 Lines: 33 On Sat, Jun 10, 2017 at 09:15:57PM +0200, Pali Roh?r wrote: > On Saturday 27 May 2017 13:55:34 Pali Roh?r wrote: > > instance_count defines number of instances of data block and instance > > itself is indexed from zero, which means first instance has number 0. > > Therefore check for invalid instance should be non-strict inequality. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pali Roh?r > > --- > > I'm marking this patch as RFC because it is not tested at all and > > probably could break existing WMI drivers. Some WMI drivers pass > > instance number 1 and I'm not sure if ACPI-WMI bytecode for those > > machines has really two instances. In more cases ACPI-WMI bytecode > > does not check instance number if supports only one instance. So > > then any instance id can be used for correct execution of ACPI-WMI > > method. > > > > So this patch is open for discussion. > > Hi! Any comments? Hi Pali, This change appears correct to me, but your comment about this parameter being ignored by ACPI-WMI is definitely concerning. Since this doesn't address a specific failure report, and it has the potential to break functional drivers, I wouldn't want to merge it without some evidence that those drivers still work. I'd suggest reaching out to the maintainers and contributors to the drivers you mention to request some help in testing. -- Darren Hart VMware Open Source Technology Center