[lkml]   [2018]   [Mar]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/7] platform/x86: fujitsu-laptop: Define constants for FUNC operations
> > #define OP_GET_CAPS     0x0
> > #define OP_GET_EVENTS 0x1
> > #define OP_SET 0x1
> > #define OP_GET 0x2
> > #define OP_GET_EXT 0x4
> > #define OP_SET_EXT 0x5
> This one looks pretty much okay (logical pairs IIUC).

Sadly, no, these are not logical pairs. But maybe this is a reasonable
compromise anyway:

- OP_GET_CAPS seems to be consistent between different functions; it
is an operation which returns a bitfield describing given model's
"capabilities" in a certain area (LEDs, buttons, etc.),

- some functions expose only OP_GET_CAPS, OP_SET, and OP_GET,

- some functions expose only OP_GET_CAPS and OP_GET_EVENTS,

- some function expose OP_GET_CAPS, OP_GET_EVENTS, OP_GET_EXT and
OP_SET_EXT (but not OP_SET or OP_GET, probably because 0x1 is
already "taken" by OP_GET_EVENTS).

So, given the above, does this layout look reasonable to you (at least
somewhat) or would you rather see these constants shuffled around in
some other way?

Best regards,
Michał Kępień

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-03-10 21:11    [W:0.080 / U:7.868 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site