Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: peaq-wmi: Add DMI check before binding to the WMI interface | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Thu, 5 Oct 2017 20:04:19 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
On 05-10-17 19:59, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:27 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> On 05-10-17 16:23, Andy Shevchenko wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Oct 5, 2017 at 5:20 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> It seems that the WMI GUID used by the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys is not >>>> as unique as a GUID should be and is used on some other devices too. >>>> >>>> This is causing spurious key-press reports on these other devices. >>>> >>>> This commits adds a DMI check to the PEAQ 2-in-1 WMI hotkeys driver to >>>> ensure that it is actually running on a PEAQ 2-in-1, fixing the >>>> spurious key-presses on these other devices. >>>> >>> >>> Recently I have pushed similar patch (another device). Can you rebase >>> against testing? >> >> >> That patch adds a blacklist, for yet another model then the 2 bugreports: >> >>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1497861 >>>> BugLink: https://bugzilla.suse.com/attachment.cgi?id=743182 >> >> >> which I've received. My patch adds a whitelist instead as it seems the GUID >> used is some very generic GUID, > > Since you are maintainer and moreover have a hardware to test I assume > that's correct thing to do... > >> so the blacklist patch should simply be >> dropped, > > ... however, the patch can't be dropped. > > Either me, or you in v2 need to revert it. Tell me what you prefer here.
Isn't the whole purpose of having a testing branch that patches can actually be dropped. AFAIK this has not even hit -next yet, so IMHO it should just be dropped ?
If it really should be reverted instead I'll leave doing a revert up to you.
> In any case, please (re)send with Cc to Kai so he or bug reportes may > have a chance to test it as well.
Ok, done.
Regards,
Hans
| |