Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] Input: xen-kbdfront - allow better run-time configuration

[Oleksandr Andrushchenko <andr2000@gmail.com>]

On 04/19/2018 04:10 PM, Jason Andryuk wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Oleksandr Andrushchenko
> <andr2000@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ok, so I'll send v2 with the following changes:
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/xen-kbdfront.c
>> b/drivers/input/misc/xen-kbdfront.c
>> index a3306aad40b0..d8cca212f737 100644
>> --- a/drivers/input/misc/xen-kbdfront.c
>> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/xen-kbdfront.c
>> @@ -51,13 +51,13 @@ module_param_array(ptr_size, int, NULL, 0444);
>>   MODULE_PARM_DESC(ptr_size,
>>          "Pointing device width, height in pixels (default 800,600)");
>>
>> -static unsigned int no_ptr_dev;
>> -module_param(no_ptr_dev, uint, 0);
>> +static bool no_ptr_dev;
>> +module_param(no_ptr_dev, bool, 0);
>>   MODULE_PARM_DESC(no_ptr_dev,
>>          "If set then no virtual pointing device exposed to the guest");
>>
>> -static unsigned int no_kbd_dev;
>> -module_param(no_kbd_dev, uint, 0);
>> +static bool no_kbd_dev;
>> +module_param(no_kbd_dev, bool, 0);
>>   MODULE_PARM_DESC(no_kbd_dev,
>>          "If set then no virtual keyboard device exposed to the guest");
> I prefer direct logic over inverse logic.  Maybe just use kbd_dev,
> default to true, but allow it to be set off?
>
> static bool kbd_dev = true;
> module_param(kbd_dev, bool, 0);
I have no preference here, either way works for me
Juergen, what do you think about the above?
> Regards,
> Jason