mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
Cc: Mark Gross <markgross@kernel.org>,
	platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] platform/surface: aggregator: Do not check for repeated unsequenced packets
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2022 19:59:50 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221113185951.224759-1-luzmaximilian@gmail.com> (raw)

Currently, we check any received packet whether we have already seen it
previously, regardless of the packet type (sequenced / unsequenced). We
do this by checking the sequence number. This assumes that sequence
numbers are valid for both sequenced and unsequenced packets. However,
this assumption appears to be incorrect.

On some devices, the sequence number field of unsequenced packets (in
particular HID input events on the Surface Pro 9) is always zero. As a
result, the current retransmission check kicks in and discards all but
the first unsequenced packet, breaking (among other things) keyboard and
touchpad input.

Note that we have, so far, only seen packets being retransmitted in
sequenced communication. In particular, this happens when there is an
ACK timeout, causing the EC (or us) to re-send the packet waiting for an
ACK. Arguably, retransmission / duplication of unsequenced packets
should not be an issue as there is no logical condition (such as an ACK
timeout) to determine when a packet should be sent again.

Therefore, remove the retransmission check for unsequenced packets
entirely to resolve the issue.

Fixes: c167b9c7e3d6 ("platform/surface: Add Surface Aggregator subsystem")
Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>
---
 .../surface/aggregator/ssh_packet_layer.c     | 24 +++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/ssh_packet_layer.c b/drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/ssh_packet_layer.c
index 6748fe4ac5d5..def8d7ac541f 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/ssh_packet_layer.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/surface/aggregator/ssh_packet_layer.c
@@ -1596,16 +1596,32 @@ static void ssh_ptl_timeout_reap(struct work_struct *work)
 		ssh_ptl_tx_wakeup_packet(ptl);
 }
 
-static bool ssh_ptl_rx_retransmit_check(struct ssh_ptl *ptl, u8 seq)
+static bool ssh_ptl_rx_retransmit_check(struct ssh_ptl *ptl, const struct ssh_frame *frame)
 {
 	int i;
 
+	/*
+	 * Ignore unsequenced packets. On some devices (notably Surface Pro 9),
+	 * unsequenced events will always be sent with SEQ=0x00. Attempting to
+	 * detect retransmission would thus just block all events.
+	 *
+	 * While sequence numbers would also allow detection of retransmitted
+	 * packets in unsequenced communication, they have only ever been used
+	 * to cover edge-cases in sequenced transmission. In particular, the
+	 * only instance of packets being retransmitted (that we are aware of)
+	 * is due to an ACK timeout. As this does not happen in unsequenced
+	 * communication, skip the retransmission check for those packets
+	 * entirely.
+	 */
+	if (frame->type == SSH_FRAME_TYPE_DATA_NSQ)
+		return false;
+
 	/*
 	 * Check if SEQ has been seen recently (i.e. packet was
 	 * re-transmitted and we should ignore it).
 	 */
 	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(ptl->rx.blocked.seqs); i++) {
-		if (likely(ptl->rx.blocked.seqs[i] != seq))
+		if (likely(ptl->rx.blocked.seqs[i] != frame->seq))
 			continue;
 
 		ptl_dbg(ptl, "ptl: ignoring repeated data packet\n");
@@ -1613,7 +1629,7 @@ static bool ssh_ptl_rx_retransmit_check(struct ssh_ptl *ptl, u8 seq)
 	}
 
 	/* Update list of blocked sequence IDs. */
-	ptl->rx.blocked.seqs[ptl->rx.blocked.offset] = seq;
+	ptl->rx.blocked.seqs[ptl->rx.blocked.offset] = frame->seq;
 	ptl->rx.blocked.offset = (ptl->rx.blocked.offset + 1)
 				  % ARRAY_SIZE(ptl->rx.blocked.seqs);
 
@@ -1624,7 +1640,7 @@ static void ssh_ptl_rx_dataframe(struct ssh_ptl *ptl,
 				 const struct ssh_frame *frame,
 				 const struct ssam_span *payload)
 {
-	if (ssh_ptl_rx_retransmit_check(ptl, frame->seq))
+	if (ssh_ptl_rx_retransmit_check(ptl, frame))
 		return;
 
 	ptl->ops.data_received(ptl, payload);
-- 
2.38.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-11-13 19:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-13 18:59 Maximilian Luz [this message]
2022-11-13 18:59 ` [PATCH 2/2] platform/surface: aggregator_registry: Add support for Surface Pro 9 Maximilian Luz
2022-11-15 16:23 ` [PATCH 1/2] platform/surface: aggregator: Do not check for repeated unsequenced packets Hans de Goede

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=20221113185951.224759-1-luzmaximilian@gmail.com \
    --to=luzmaximilian@gmail.com \
    --cc=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=markgross@kernel.org \
    --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®