Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: thinkpad_acpi: Remove unreachable code in beep_read()

[Mark Pearson]

Hi Thorsten,

On Mon, Sep 7, 2026, at 5:01 AM, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> The procfs entry /proc/acpi/ibm/beep is only created if beep_init()
> succeeds, which requires beep_handle to be non-NULL. Remove the
> unreachable code branch from beep_read().
>
> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <blum@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c | 8 ++------
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c 
> b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> index 1082c36ae723..069c9f1c359f 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/lenovo/thinkpad_acpi.c
> @@ -5936,12 +5936,8 @@ static int __init beep_init(struct 
> ibm_init_struct *iibm)
> 
>  static int beep_read(struct seq_file *m)
>  {
> -	if (!beep_handle)
> -		seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tnot supported\n");
> -	else {
> -		seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tsupported\n");
> -		seq_puts(m, "commands:\t<cmd> (<cmd> is 0-17)\n");
> -	}
> +	seq_puts(m, "status:\t\tsupported\n");
> +	seq_puts(m, "commands:\t<cmd> (<cmd> is 0-17)\n");
> 
>  	return 0;
>  }

Change looks good to me.
I guess the beep_write could be similarly updated?

Mark