Re: [PATCH v1 3/5] platform/x86: fujitsu: Register ACPI notify handlers directly

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Monday, March 9, 2026 2:00:31 PM CET Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Feb 2026, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> > From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > To facilitate subsequent conversion of the driver to using struct
> > platform_driver instead of struct acpi_driver, make it install its ACPI
> > notify handlers directly instead of using struct acpi_driver .notify()
> > callbacks.
> > 
> > No intentional functional impact.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wysocki@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> >  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c b/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c
> > index 1adce90ae3e6..cb13c06b8f35 100644
> > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c
> > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/fujitsu-laptop.c
> > @@ -502,8 +502,9 @@ static int fujitsu_backlight_register(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  
> >  /* Brightness notify */
> >  
> > -static void acpi_fujitsu_bl_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
> > +static void acpi_fujitsu_bl_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> >  {
> > +	struct acpi_device *device = data;
> >  	struct fujitsu_bl *priv = acpi_driver_data(device);
> >  	int oldb, newb;
> >  
> > @@ -558,7 +559,18 @@ static int acpi_fujitsu_bl_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  	if (ret)
> >  		return ret;
> >  
> > -	return fujitsu_backlight_register(device);
> > +	ret = fujitsu_backlight_register(device);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		return ret;
> > +
> > +	return acpi_dev_install_notify_handler(device, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > +					       acpi_fujitsu_bl_notify, device);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void acpi_fujitsu_bl_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
> > +{
> > +	acpi_dev_remove_notify_handler(device, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > +				       acpi_fujitsu_bl_notify);
> >  }
> >  
> >  /* ACPI device for hotkey handling */
> > @@ -941,8 +953,9 @@ static void acpi_fujitsu_laptop_release(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  	}
> >  }
> >  
> > -static void acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
> > +static void acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
> >  {
> > +	struct acpi_device *device = data;
> >  	struct fujitsu_laptop *priv = acpi_driver_data(device);
> >  	unsigned long flags;
> >  	int scancode, i = 0;
> > @@ -1056,6 +1069,11 @@ static int acpi_fujitsu_laptop_add(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  	if (ret)
> >  		goto err_free_fifo;
> >  
> > +	ret = acpi_dev_install_notify_handler(device, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > +					      acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify, device);
> > +	if (ret)
> > +		goto err_free_fifo;
> 
> Hi Rafael,
> 
> Is the rollback path still correct after adding this here?

Why wouldn't it be?  There's only kfifo_free() in it.

> > +
> >  	ret = fujitsu_battery_charge_control_add(device);
> >  	if (ret < 0)
> >  		pr_warn("Unable to register battery charge control: %d\n", ret);
> > @@ -1074,6 +1092,9 @@ static void acpi_fujitsu_laptop_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
> >  
> >  	fujitsu_battery_charge_control_remove(device);
> >  
> > +	acpi_dev_remove_notify_handler(device, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
> > +				       acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify);
> > +
> >  	fujitsu_laptop_platform_remove(device);
> >  
> >  	kfifo_free(&priv->fifo);
> > @@ -1092,7 +1113,7 @@ static struct acpi_driver acpi_fujitsu_bl_driver = {
> >  	.ids = fujitsu_bl_device_ids,
> >  	.ops = {
> >  		.add = acpi_fujitsu_bl_add,
> > -		.notify = acpi_fujitsu_bl_notify,
> > +		.remove = acpi_fujitsu_bl_remove,
> >  		},
> >  };
> >  
> > @@ -1108,7 +1129,6 @@ static struct acpi_driver acpi_fujitsu_laptop_driver = {
> >  	.ops = {
> >  		.add = acpi_fujitsu_laptop_add,
> >  		.remove = acpi_fujitsu_laptop_remove,
> > -		.notify = acpi_fujitsu_laptop_notify,
> >  		},
> >  };
> >  
> > 
> 
>