lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Sep]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 07/13] eeepc-laptop: make disp attribute really write-only
    On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 01:00:07PM -0700, Darren Hart wrote:
    > On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 01:06:46AM +0200, Frans Klaver wrote:
    > > The disp attribute is write-only, but sysfs doesn't know this. Currently
    > > show_sys_acpi() is mimicking sysfs behavior, if the underlying acpi call
    > > should fail. This is not ideal; behaving like sysfs is better left to
    > > sysfs.
    > >
    > > Introduce EEEPC_CREATE_DEVICE_ATTR_WO() to instantiate a write-only
    > > attribute, and declare the disp attribute with it. Sysfs makes sure
    > > userspace can only write to disp at all times. This also means we can
    > > back to propagating any errors from get_acpi().
    > >
    > > Signed-off-by: Frans Klaver <fransklaver@gmail.com>
    > > ---
    > > drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c | 8 ++++++--
    > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
    > >
    > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
    > > index 3c04b77..4f6490d 100644
    > > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
    > > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/eeepc-laptop.c
    > > @@ -291,7 +291,7 @@ static ssize_t show_sys_acpi(struct device *dev, int cm, char *buf)
    > > int value = get_acpi(eeepc, cm);
    > >
    > > if (value < 0)
    > > - return -EIO;
    > > + return value;
    > > return sprintf(buf, "%d\n", value);
    > > }
    > >
    > > @@ -316,9 +316,13 @@ static ssize_t show_sys_acpi(struct device *dev, int cm, char *buf)
    > > EEEPC_ACPI_STORE_FUNC(_name, _cm) \
    > > static DEVICE_ATTR(_name, _mode, show_##_name, store_##_name)
    > >
    > > +#define EEEPC_CREATE_DEVICE_ATTR_WO(_name, _mode, _cm) \
    > > + EEEPC_ACPI_STORE_FUNC(_name, _cm) \
    > > + static DEVICE_ATTR(_name, _mode, NULL, store_##_name)
    >
    > Per Greg's previous reply, I presume DEVICE_ATTR_WO here?

    Yes, already taken care of in all similar cases.

    Thanks,
    Frans


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-09-15 22:41    [W:4.137 / U:0.240 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site