mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>
To: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>,
	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
	Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.4 regression fix] Input: soc_button_array - partial revert of support for newer surface devices
Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2019 15:20:51 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <96cea5be-d285-8323-1ab2-9c8e87993165@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <222c364a-bc2b-5960-3fe4-7d1ce222e3e2@gmail.com>

Hi,

On 05-10-2019 14:17, Maximilian Luz wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> sorry for the inconvenience this change has caused.
> 
> On 10/5/19 12:55 PM, Hans de Goede wrote:
>> 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.
> 
> Would I have known the impact, then yes. This change was added due to
> some reported instances where it seems that soc_button_array would
> occasionally load on MSHW0040 before the GPIO controller was ready,
> causing power and volume buttons to not work.
> 
>> I guess this change may have been added to deal with -EPROBE_DEFER errors,
> 
> Correct. After a comment mentioned that gpiod_get() returning
> -EPROBE_DEFER would be the proper way to detect this, I decided on this
> change.

Ok, on x86 the GPIO drivers really should all be builtin because
various ACPI methods including device D0 / D3 (power-on/off) methods
may depend on them. So normally this should never happen.

If this (-EPROBE_DEFER on surface devices) somehow still is happening
please let me know and we will figure something out.

> Might I suggest the following addition:
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>

S-o-b is only for patches which pass through your hands, e.g. if
you make changes to my patch and submit a v2 of it.

I guess you mean / want one of:

Acked-by: ...

or

Reviewed-by: ...


?

Regards,

Hans



> ---
>   drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++-----
>   1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> index 97e3639e99d0..a0f0c977b790 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/soc_button_array.c
> @@ -92,11 +92,18 @@ soc_button_device_create(struct platform_device *pdev,
>               continue;
> 
>           gpio = soc_button_lookup_gpio(&pdev->dev, info->acpi_index);
> -        if (gpio < 0 && gpio != -ENOENT) {
> -            error = gpio;
> -            goto err_free_mem;
> -        } else if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) {
> -            /* Skip GPIO if not present */
> +        if (!gpio_is_valid(gpio)) {
> +            /*
> +             * Skip GPIO if not present. Note we deliberately
> +             * ignore -EPROBE_DEFER errors here. On some devices
> +             * Intel is using so called virtual GPIOs which are not
> +             * GPIOs at all but some way for AML code to check some
> +             * random status bits without need a custom opregion.
> +             * In some cases the resources table we parse points to
> +             * such a virtual GPIO, since these are not real GPIOs
> +             * we do not have a driver for these so they will never
> +             * show up, therefor we ignore -EPROBE_DEFER.
> +             */
>               continue;
>           }
> 
> @@ -429,6 +436,14 @@ static int soc_device_check_MSHW0040(struct device *dev)
> 
>       dev_dbg(dev, "OEM Platform Revision %llu\n", oem_platform_rev);
> 
> +    /*
> +     * Explicitly check if GPIO controller is ready. This check is done here
> +     * to avoid issues with virtual GPIOs on other chips, as elaborated above.
> +     * We are at least expecting one GPIO pin for the power button (index 0).
> +     */
> +    if (soc_button_lookup_gpio(dev, 0) == -EPROBE_DEFER)
> +        return -EPROBE_DEFER;
> +
>       return 0;
>   }
> 


  reply	other threads:[~2019-10-05 13:20 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 [this message]
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
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=96cea5be-d285-8323-1ab2-9c8e87993165@redhat.com \
    --to=hdegoede@redhat.com \
    --cc=andy@infradead.org \
    --cc=dmitry.torokhov@gmail.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®