Re: [PATCH 01/02] ACPI: sysfs eject support for ACPI scan handlers

[Toshi Kani]

On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 10:33 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> 2013/02/08 10:10, Toshi Kani wrote:
> > On Fri, 2013-02-08 at 09:50 +0900, Yasuaki Ishimatsu wrote:
> >> Hi Toshi,
> >>
> >> 2013/02/07 7:50, Toshi Kani wrote:
> >>> Changed sysfs eject, acpi_eject_store(), to support ACPI scan handlers.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Toshi Kani <toshi.kani@xxxxxx>
> >>> ---
> >>>    drivers/acpi/scan.c |    2 +-
> >>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/scan.c b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> >>> index cfd7a69..3ff632e 100644
> >>> --- a/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> >>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/scan.c
> >>> @@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ acpi_eject_store(struct device *d, struct device_attribute *attr,
> >>>    		return -EINVAL;
> >>>    	}
> >>>    #ifndef FORCE_EJECT
> >>
> >>> -	if (acpi_device->driver == NULL) {
> >>> +	if (!acpi_device->driver && !acpi_device->handler) {
> >>
> >> I don't understand the fix.
> >>
> >> The if sentence becomes true, when both acpi_device->driver and acpi_device->handler
> >> are NULL. It means that acpi_eject_store() runs if either acpi_device->driver or
> >> acpi_device->handler has pointer. Is it O.K.?
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> >> I think it should be if (!acpi_device->driver || !acpi_device->handler).
> >
> > No, the condition has to be "&&" because an acpi_device is _either_
> > bound to an ACPI driver or an ACPI scan handler.
> 
> Thank you for you clarification. I understood it.
> 
> Acked-by: Yasuaki Ishimatsu <isimatu.yasuaki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks Yasuaki!
-Toshi


> 
> Thanks,
> Yasuaki Ishimatsu
> 
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Toshi
> >
> >
> 
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/