From: Yauhen Kharuzhy <jekhor@gmail.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 regression fix] Input: soc_button_array - partial revert of support for newer surface devices
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 15:27:11 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191005122711.GC7077@jeknote.loshitsa1.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191005105551.353273-1-hdegoede@redhat.com>
On Sat, Oct 05, 2019 at 12:55:51PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Commit c394159310d0 ("Input: soc_button_array - add support for newer
> surface devices") not only added support for the MSHW0040 ACPI HID,
> but for some reason it also makes changes to the error handling of the
> soc_button_lookup_gpio() call in soc_button_device_create(). Note ideally
> this seamingly unrelated change would have been made in a separate commit,
> with a message explaining the what and why of this change.
>
> I guess this change may have been added to deal with -EPROBE_DEFER errors,
> but in case of the existing support for PNP0C40 devices, treating
> -EPROBE_DEFER as any other error is deliberate, see the comment this
> commit adds for why.
>
> The actual returning of -EPROBE_DEFER to the caller of soc_button_probe()
> introduced by the new error checking causes a serious regression:
>
> On devices with so called virtual GPIOs soc_button_lookup_gpio() will
> always return -EPROBE_DEFER for these fake GPIOs, when this happens
> during the second call of soc_button_device_create() we already have
> successfully registered our first child. This causes the kernel to think
> we are making progress with probing things even though we unregister the
> child before again before we return the -EPROBE_DEFER. Since we are making
> progress the kernel will retry deferred-probes again immediately ending
> up stuck in a loop with the following showing in dmesg:
>
> [ 124.022697] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6537
> [ 124.040764] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6538
> [ 124.056967] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6539
> [ 124.072143] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6540
> [ 124.092373] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6541
> [ 124.108065] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6542
> [ 124.128483] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6543
> [ 124.147141] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6544
> [ 124.165070] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6545
> [ 124.179775] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6546
> [ 124.202726] input: gpio-keys as /devices/platform/INTCFD9:00/gpio-keys.0.auto/input/input6547
> <continues on and on and on>
>
> And 1 CPU core being stuck at 100% and udev hanging since it is waiting
> for the modprobe of soc_button_array to return.
>
> This patch reverts the soc_button_lookup_gpio() error handling changes,
> fixing this regression.
I confirm this issue and I made similar hotfix while developing of other
things, so it's actual and patch should work. I will test it at my hardware
soon.
--
Yauhen Kharuzhy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-05 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-05 10:55 Hans de Goede
2019-10-05 12:17 ` Maximilian Luz
2019-10-05 13:20 ` Hans de Goede
2019-10-05 13:33 ` Maximilian Luz
2019-10-05 15:01 ` Maximilian Luz
2019-10-05 20:14 ` Hans de Goede
2019-10-05 12:27 ` Yauhen Kharuzhy [this message]
2019-10-08 23:44 ` Dmitry Torokhov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191005122711.GC7077@jeknote.loshitsa1.net \
--to=jekhor@gmail.com \
--cc=andy@infradead.org \
--cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com \
--cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luzmaximilian@gmail.com \
--cc=platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®