Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] platform/x86: think-lmi: add missing type attribute

[Mark Pearson]

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023, at 9:57 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 3/20/23 14:56, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> Hi Mark,
>> 
>> It seems that while adding linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx you have dropped
>> platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx. For future patches please Cc both.
>> 
>> platform-driver-x86@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx needs to be Cc-ed for patches
>> to show up in patchwork:
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/platform-driver-x86/list/
>> 
>> Which I use as my primary means of tracking which patches I need
>> to review / merge (note no need to resend this series I have it
>> on my radar).
>> 
>> More importantly you seem to not have Cc-ed
>> Thomas Weißschuh on this version ?
>
> Never mind, I just noticed that Thomas has 2 email addresses
> and you did Cc their other address...

Yep - and no idea how I missed pdx86 mailing list....must have been a copy paste error :( Sorry - not deliberate.

Mark

>
> Regards,
>
> Hans
>
>
>
>> On 3/20/23 01:32, Mark Pearson wrote:
>>> This driver was missing the mandatory type attribute...oops.
>>>
>>> Add it in along with logic to determine whether the attribute is an
>>> enumeration type or a string by parsing the possible_values attribute.
>>>
>>> Upstream bug https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=216460
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <mpearson-lenovo@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Changes in v4:
>>>  - Unchanged. Sending to linux-kernel mailing list as recommended
>>> Changes in v3:
>>>  - Rebased on latest pdx86, review_hans branch
>>> Changes in v2: 
>>>  - Simplify the code and move type determination into show function
>>>  - Don't use Fixes with URL in commit info
>>>
>>>  drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
>>>  1 file changed, 17 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>>> index cc66f7cbccf2..a765bf8c27d8 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/think-lmi.c
>>> @@ -947,6 +947,20 @@ static ssize_t possible_values_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute
>>>  	return sysfs_emit(buf, "%s\n", setting->possible_values);
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static ssize_t type_show(struct kobject *kobj, struct kobj_attribute *attr,
>>> +		char *buf)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct tlmi_attr_setting *setting = to_tlmi_attr_setting(kobj);
>>> +
>>> +	if (setting->possible_values) {
>>> +		/* Figure out what setting type is as BIOS does not return this */
>>> +		if (strchr(setting->possible_values, ','))
>>> +			return sysfs_emit(buf, "enumeration\n");
>>> +	}
>>> +	/* Anything else is going to be a string */
>>> +	return sysfs_emit(buf, "string\n");
>>> +}
>>> +
>>>  static ssize_t current_value_store(struct kobject *kobj,
>>>  		struct kobj_attribute *attr,
>>>  		const char *buf, size_t count)
>>> @@ -1036,10 +1050,13 @@ static struct kobj_attribute attr_possible_values = __ATTR_RO(possible_values);
>>>  
>>>  static struct kobj_attribute attr_current_val = __ATTR_RW_MODE(current_value, 0600);
>>>  
>>> +static struct kobj_attribute attr_type = __ATTR_RO(type);
>>> +
>>>  static struct attribute *tlmi_attrs[] = {
>>>  	&attr_displ_name.attr,
>>>  	&attr_current_val.attr,
>>>  	&attr_possible_values.attr,
>>> +	&attr_type.attr,
>>>  	NULL
>>>  };
>>>