Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst | 2 ++ drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
Add support for handhelds with same EC registers
- AYANEO 2
- AYANEO GEEK
All functionality tests succeed on AYANEO 2 by "pastaq" user on Discord
and AYANEO GEEK tested by "oneoc" Discord user.
Signed-off-by: Joaquín Ignacio Aramendía <samsagax@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst | 2 ++
drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst b/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
index 566a8d5bde08..4ab442301415 100644
--- a/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
+++ b/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
@@ -25,8 +25,10 @@ Supported devices
Currently the driver supports the following handhelds:
- AOK ZOE A1
+ - Aya Neo 2
- Aya Neo AIR
- Aya Neo AIR Pro
+ - Aya Neo Geek
- OneXPlayer AMD
- OneXPlayer mini AMD
- OneXPlayer mini AMD PRO
diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c b/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
index ae67207030e8..9093c608dee0 100644
--- a/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
+++ b/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
@@ -42,8 +42,10 @@ static bool unlock_global_acpi_lock(void)
enum oxp_board {
aok_zoe_a1 = 1,
+ aya_neo_2,
aya_neo_air,
aya_neo_air_pro,
+ aya_neo_geek,
oxp_mini_amd,
oxp_mini_amd_pro,
};
@@ -62,6 +64,13 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id dmi_table[] = {
},
.driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aok_zoe_a1},
},
+ {
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
+ DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "AYANEO 2"),
+ },
+ .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_2},
+ },
{
.matches = {
DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
@@ -76,6 +85,13 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id dmi_table[] = {
},
.driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_air_pro},
},
+ {
+ .matches = {
+ DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
+ DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GEEK"),
+ },
+ .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_geek},
+ },
{
.matches = {
DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "ONE-NETBOOK"),
@@ -178,8 +194,10 @@ static int oxp_platform_read(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
if (ret)
return ret;
switch (board) {
+ case aya_neo_2:
case aya_neo_air:
case aya_neo_air_pro:
+ case aya_neo_geek:
case oxp_mini_amd:
*val = (*val * 255) / 100;
break;
@@ -217,8 +235,10 @@ static int oxp_platform_write(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
if (val < 0 || val > 255)
return -EINVAL;
switch (board) {
+ case aya_neo_2:
case aya_neo_air:
case aya_neo_air_pro:
+ case aya_neo_geek:
case oxp_mini_amd:
val = (val * 100) / 255;
break;
--
2.40.1
On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 03:44:20PM -0300, Joaquín Ignacio Aramendía wrote:
> Add support for handhelds with same EC registers
> - AYANEO 2
> - AYANEO GEEK
>
> All functionality tests succeed on AYANEO 2 by "pastaq" user on Discord
> and AYANEO GEEK tested by "oneoc" Discord user.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joaquín Ignacio Aramendía <samsagax@gmail.com>
CHECK: No space is necessary after a cast
#130: FILE: drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c:72:
+ .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_2},
CHECK: No space is necessary after a cast
#144: FILE: drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c:93:
+ .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_geek},
Please run checkpatch --strict on your patches. Never mind, I'll apply the
patch anyway - I see the other entries are the same.
That makes me have a closer look at the code. What is the purpose of the
odd typecast anyway ? Why not just
.driver_data = (void *)aya_neo_2,
and
board = (enum oxp_board)dmi_entry->driver_data;
?
Guenter
> ---
> Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst | 2 ++
> drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 22 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst b/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
> index 566a8d5bde08..4ab442301415 100644
> --- a/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/hwmon/oxp-sensors.rst
> @@ -25,8 +25,10 @@ Supported devices
> Currently the driver supports the following handhelds:
>
> - AOK ZOE A1
> + - Aya Neo 2
> - Aya Neo AIR
> - Aya Neo AIR Pro
> + - Aya Neo Geek
> - OneXPlayer AMD
> - OneXPlayer mini AMD
> - OneXPlayer mini AMD PRO
> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c b/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
> index ae67207030e8..9093c608dee0 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c
> @@ -42,8 +42,10 @@ static bool unlock_global_acpi_lock(void)
>
> enum oxp_board {
> aok_zoe_a1 = 1,
> + aya_neo_2,
> aya_neo_air,
> aya_neo_air_pro,
> + aya_neo_geek,
> oxp_mini_amd,
> oxp_mini_amd_pro,
> };
> @@ -62,6 +64,13 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id dmi_table[] = {
> },
> .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aok_zoe_a1},
> },
> + {
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "AYANEO 2"),
> + },
> + .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_2},
> + },
> {
> .matches = {
> DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
> @@ -76,6 +85,13 @@ static const struct dmi_system_id dmi_table[] = {
> },
> .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_air_pro},
> },
> + {
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "AYANEO"),
> + DMI_EXACT_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_NAME, "GEEK"),
> + },
> + .driver_data = (void *) &(enum oxp_board) {aya_neo_geek},
> + },
> {
> .matches = {
> DMI_MATCH(DMI_BOARD_VENDOR, "ONE-NETBOOK"),
> @@ -178,8 +194,10 @@ static int oxp_platform_read(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> switch (board) {
> + case aya_neo_2:
> case aya_neo_air:
> case aya_neo_air_pro:
> + case aya_neo_geek:
> case oxp_mini_amd:
> *val = (*val * 255) / 100;
> break;
> @@ -217,8 +235,10 @@ static int oxp_platform_write(struct device *dev, enum hwmon_sensor_types type,
> if (val < 0 || val > 255)
> return -EINVAL;
> switch (board) {
> + case aya_neo_2:
> case aya_neo_air:
> case aya_neo_air_pro:
> + case aya_neo_geek:
> case oxp_mini_amd:
> val = (val * 100) / 255;
> break;
Hello Guenter and thanks for your quick review. > Please run checkpatch --strict on your patches. Never mind, I'll apply the > patch anyway - I see the other entries are the same. I've run it before on the other patches... did something change in the checkpatch? Nevermid, After this one I may submit a patch to fix all styling in one go > That makes me have a closer look at the code. What is the purpose of the > odd typecast anyway ? Why not just > .driver_data = (void *)aya_neo_2, > and > board = (enum oxp_board)dmi_entry->driver_data; > ? I don't know why but the compiler would complain with the casting from enum to void*. Found out that explicitly casting the enum literal before casting it to void* works and the compiler stopped complaining so I went with it. As a follow up question, since this driver has become more AYANEO than OXP since its inception, wouldn't it be better to change the description? Joaquín Aramendía
On 4/27/23 16:16, Joaquin Aramendia wrote: > Hello Guenter and thanks for your quick review. > >> Please run checkpatch --strict on your patches. Never mind, I'll apply the >> patch anyway - I see the other entries are the same. > I've run it before on the other patches... did something change in the > checkpatch? > Nevermid, After this one I may submit a patch to fix all styling in one go > >> That makes me have a closer look at the code. What is the purpose of the >> odd typecast anyway ? Why not just >> .driver_data = (void *)aya_neo_2, >> and >> board = (enum oxp_board)dmi_entry->driver_data; >> ? > I don't know why but the compiler would complain with the casting from > enum to void*. Really ? I tried with both 32 bit and 64 bit targets, and the above worked just fine (with W=1). I tried with gcc 10.3 as well as 11.3. What is your compiler version, what exactly is the warning/error message you observed, and how exactly did your code look like ? > Found out that explicitly casting the enum literal before casting it > to void* works and > the compiler stopped complaining so I went with it. > You are not casting the enum literal, but a pointer to it. Guenter > As a follow up question, since this driver has become more AYANEO than > OXP since its inception, > wouldn't it be better to change the description? > > Joaquín Aramendía
> > I don't know why but the compiler would complain with the casting from > > enum to void*. > > Really ? I tried with both 32 bit and 64 bit targets, and the above worked > just fine (with W=1). I tried with gcc 10.3 as well as 11.3. What is > your compiler version, what exactly is the warning/error message you > observed, and how exactly did your code look like ? Said something about an invalid cast of an lvalue? I can´t remember exactly and couldn't reproduce it again. Will change all to your form after this patch gets merged if you like, just to keep things atomic. > > > Found out that explicitly casting the enum literal before casting it > > to void* works and > > the compiler stopped complaining so I went with it. > > > > You are not casting the enum literal, but a pointer to it. Yes. I'm taking an enum literal and taking its pointer to cast it to a void*. A little cumbersome, but maybe it can be avoided by using your proposed form directly and after making sure it works. -- Joaquín I. Aramendía
On 4/28/23 12:15, Joaquin Aramendia wrote: >>> I don't know why but the compiler would complain with the casting from >>> enum to void*. >> >> Really ? I tried with both 32 bit and 64 bit targets, and the above worked >> just fine (with W=1). I tried with gcc 10.3 as well as 11.3. What is >> your compiler version, what exactly is the warning/error message you >> observed, and how exactly did your code look like ? > > Said something about an invalid cast of an lvalue? I can´t remember exactly Like this, maybe ? drivers/hwmon/oxp-sensors.c:63:26: error: lvalue required as unary ‘&’ operand That would have been something along the line of .driver_data = (void *)&aok_zoe_a1, or driver_data = &aok_zoe_a1, > and couldn't reproduce it again. Will change all to your form after > this patch gets > merged if you like, just to keep things atomic. > Please do. Thanks, Guenter >> >>> Found out that explicitly casting the enum literal before casting it >>> to void* works and >>> the compiler stopped complaining so I went with it. >>> >> >> You are not casting the enum literal, but a pointer to it. > > Yes. I'm taking an enum literal and taking its pointer to cast it to a void*. > A little cumbersome, but maybe it can be avoided by using your proposed > form directly and after making sure it works. >
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.