Hi Hans,


On 25/10/2020 08:03, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

On 10/20/20 2:15 AM, Mark Pearson wrote:

quoted

Use input device event support for notifying userspace of lap mode sensor
state changes.

Signed-off-by: Mark Pearson <redacted>
---
  drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c | 75 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
  1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
index 5ddf2775fb06..c20b9902270b 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/thinkpad_acpi.c

@@ -4013,7 +4013,7 @@ static bool hotkey_notify_usrevent(const u32 hkey,
  }
  
  static void thermal_dump_all_sensors(void);
-static void proxsensor_refresh(void);
+static void proxsensor_refresh(bool palm, bool lap);
  
  static bool hotkey_notify_6xxx(const u32 hkey,
  				 bool *send_acpi_ev,

@@ -4081,7 +4081,7 @@ static bool hotkey_notify_6xxx(const u32 hkey,
  	case TP_HKEY_EV_PALM_DETECTED:
  	case TP_HKEY_EV_PALM_UNDETECTED:
  		/* palm detected  - pass on to event handler */
-		proxsensor_refresh();
+		proxsensor_refresh(true /* palm */, false /* lap */);
  		return true;
  
  	default:

@@ -9929,6 +9929,23 @@ static struct ibm_struct dytc_driver_data = {
  struct input_dev *tpacpi_sw_dev;
  bool has_palmsensor;
  bool palmsensor_state;
+bool has_lapsensor;
+bool lapsensor_state;

Again, drop the global _state caching, it is not necessary.

Agreed - will do.

quoted

+
+static int lapsensor_get(bool *present, bool *state)
+{
+	acpi_handle dytc_handle;
+	int output;
+
+	*present = false;
+	if (ACPI_FAILURE(acpi_get_handle(hkey_handle, "DYTC", &dytc_handle)))
+		return -ENODEV;
+	if (!acpi_evalf(dytc_handle, &output, NULL, "dd", DYTC_CMD_GET))
+		return -EIO;
+	*present = true; /*If we get his far, we have lapmode support*/
+	*state = output & BIT(DYTC_GET_LAPMODE_BIT) ? true : false;
+	return 0;
+}
  
  static int palmsensor_get(bool *present, bool *state)
  {

@@ -9945,36 +9962,56 @@ static int palmsensor_get(bool *present, bool *state)
  	return 0;
  }
  
-static void proxsensor_refresh(void)
+static void proxsensor_refresh(bool palm, bool lap)

There is zero shared code between the palm ==true and the
lap ==true paths, please just make this 2 separate functions.

And then I guess rename the original proxsensor_refresh to
palmsensor_refresh (note please do this in the 2/3 patch)
and add a new lapsensor_refresh

Yeah - makes sense. Will do.

quoted

  {
  	bool new_state;
  	int err;
  
-	if (has_palmsensor) {
+	if (palm && has_palmsensor) {
  		err = palmsensor_get(&has_palmsensor, &new_state);
-		if (err)
-			return;

And then you can also keep the if (err) return; construct, which
is a bit cleaner (more common used) solution vs the !err way
of handling errors.

Agreed.

quoted

-		if (new_state != palmsensor_state) {
+		if (!err && (new_state != palmsensor_state)) {
  			input_report_switch(tpacpi_sw_dev, SW_PALMREST_PROXIMITY, new_state);
  			input_sync(tpacpi_sw_dev);
  			palmsensor_state = new_state;
  		}
  	}
+
+	if (lap && has_lapsensor) {
+		err = lapsensor_get(&has_lapsensor, &new_state);
+		if (!err && (new_state != lapsensor_state)) {
+			input_report_switch(tpacpi_sw_dev, SW_LAP_PROXIMITY, new_state);
+			input_sync(tpacpi_sw_dev);
+			lapsensor_state = new_state;

Same as with the other patch there is no need for the
new_state != lapsensor_state check, the input core does this for you
turning reporting the same state twice into a no-op.

Agreed

quoted

+		}
+	}
  }
  
  static int tpacpi_proxsensor_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
  {
-	int palm_err;
+	int palm_err, lap_err, err;
  
+	/* Make sure globals are set to a sensible initial value */
+	has_palmsensor = false;
+	has_lapsensor = false;
  	palm_err = palmsensor_get(&has_palmsensor, &palmsensor_state);
+	lap_err = lapsensor_get(&has_lapsensor, &lapsensor_state);
+
  	/* If support isn't available (ENODEV) then don't return an error */
-	if (palm_err == -ENODEV)
+	if ((palm_err == -ENODEV) && (lap_err == -ENODEV))
  		return 0;

return 1, see comment on previous patch.

## begin block ###

quoted

-	/* For all other errors we can flag the failure */
+	/* If both sensors error out - return an error */
+	if (palm_err && lap_err)
+		return palm_err ? palm_err : lap_err;
+	/*
+	 * If just one sensor not available, we still want the input device,
+	 * so just flag it and carry on
+	 */
  	if (palm_err)
-		return palm_err;
+		pr_info("Palm sensor returned error %d", palm_err);
+	if (lap_err)
+		pr_info("Lap sensor returned error %d", lap_err);

### end block ###

thinkpad_acpi will typically error out completely on non -ENODEV
errors and the palmsensor code from patch 2/3 also does that.
Note that returning an error from a module/sub-driver's init() is
fatal (causes the module to not load), so before this change the
palmsensor_get call failing with a non -ENODEV error was fatal.
This may seem a bit harsh, but it is how error handling in
thinkpad_acpi has worked so far, so lets be consistent here.

Also if now only 1 of the 2 sensors is available you will log
the -ENODEV error.

So this whole block should be replaced with something like this:

	if (palm_err && palm_err != ENODEV)
		return palm_err;

	if (lap_err && lap_err != ENODEV)
		return lap_err;

Understood - that was my aim and I think I just messed up here.
Thanks

quoted

  
-	if (has_palmsensor) {
+	if (has_palmsensor || has_lapsensor) {
  		tpacpi_sw_dev = input_allocate_device();
  		if (!tpacpi_sw_dev)
  			return -ENOMEM;

@@ -9990,10 +10027,14 @@ static int tpacpi_proxsensor_init(struct ibm_init_struct *iibm)
  			input_set_capability(tpacpi_sw_dev, EV_SW, SW_PALMREST_PROXIMITY);
  			input_report_switch(tpacpi_sw_dev, SW_PALMREST_PROXIMITY, palmsensor_state);
  		}
-		palm_err = input_register_device(tpacpi_sw_dev);
-		if (palm_err) {
+		if (has_lapsensor) {
+			input_set_capability(tpacpi_sw_dev, EV_SW, SW_LAP_PROXIMITY);
+			input_report_switch(tpacpi_sw_dev, SW_LAP_PROXIMITY, lapsensor_state);
+		}
+		err = input_register_device(tpacpi_sw_dev);
+		if (err) {
  			input_free_device(tpacpi_sw_dev);
-			return palm_err;
+			return err;
  		}
  	}
  	return 0;

@@ -10057,8 +10098,10 @@ static void tpacpi_driver_event(const unsigned int hkey_event)
  		mutex_unlock(&kbdlight_mutex);
  	}
  
-	if (hkey_event == TP_HKEY_EV_THM_CSM_COMPLETED)
+	if (hkey_event == TP_HKEY_EV_THM_CSM_COMPLETED) {
  		dytc_lapmode_refresh();
+		proxsensor_refresh(false /* palm */, true /* lap */);
+	}
  
  }
  

Otherwise this looks good to me,

Regards,

Hans

Thanks for the review
Mark