Hi, On 1/6/21 8:33 PM, Alex Deucher wrote: > On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 1:10 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> On 1/6/21 6:07 PM, Alex Deucher wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 6, 2021 at 11:25 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi All, >>>> >>>> I get Cc-ed on all Fedora kernel bugs and this one stood out to me: >>>> >>>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1911763 >>>> >>>> Since I've done a lot of work on the acpi-video code I thought I should >>>> take a look. I've managed to help the user with a kernel-commandline >>>> option which stops video.ko (the acpi-video kernel module) from emitting >>>> key-press events for ACPI_VIDEO_NOTIFY_PROBE events. >>>> >>>> This is on a Dell Vostro laptop with i915/radeon hybrid gfx. >>>> >>>> I was thinking about adding a DMI quirk for this, but from the brief time >>>> that I worked on nouveau (and specifically hybrid gfx setups) I know that >>>> these events get fired on hybrid gfx setups when the discrete GPU is >>>> powered down and something happens which requires the discrete GPUs drivers >>>> attention, like an external monitor being plugged into a connector handled >>>> by the dGPU (note that is not the case here). >>>> >>>> So I took a quick look at the radeon code and the radeon_atif_handler() >>>> function from drivers/gpu/drm/radeon/radeon_acpi.c. When successful that >>>> returns NOTIFY_BAD which suppresses the key-press. >>>> >>>> But in various cases it returns NOTIFY_DONE instead which does not >>>> suppress the key-press event. So I think that the spurious key-press events >>>> which the user is seeing should be avoided by this function returning >>>> NOTIFY_BAD. >>>> >>>> Specifically I'm wondering if we should not return >>>> NOTIFY_BAD when count == 0? I guess this can cause problems if there >>>> are multiple GPUs, but we could check if the acpi-event is for the >>>> pci-device the radeon driver is bound to. This would require changing the >>>> acpi-notify code to also pass the acpi_device pointer as part of the >>>> acpi_bus_event but that should not be a problem. >>>> >>> >>> For A+A PX/HG systems, we'd want the notifications for both the dGPU >>> and the APU since some of the events are relevant to one or the other. >>> ATIF_DGPU_DISPLAY_EVENT is only relevant to the dGPU, while >>> ATIF_PANEL_BRIGHTNESS_CHANGE_REQUEST would be possibly relevant to >>> both (if there was a mux), but mainly the APU. >>> ATIF_SYSTEM_POWER_SOURCE_CHANGE_REQUEST would be relevant to both. >>> The other events have extended bits to determine which GPU the event >>> is targeted at. >> >> Right, but AFAIK on hybrid systems there are 2 ACPI video-bus devices, >> one for each of the iGPU and dGPU which is why I suggested passing >> the video-bus acpi_device as extra data in acpi_bus_event and then >> radeon_atif_handler() could check if the acpi_device is the companion >> device of the GPU. This assumes that events for GPU# will also >> originate from (through an ACPI ASL notify call) the ACPI video-bus >> which belongs to that GPU. > > That's not the case. For PX/HG systems, ATIF is in the iGPU's > namespace, on dGPU only systems, ATIF is in the dGPU's namespace. That assumes and AMD iGPU + AMD dGPU I believe ? The system on which the spurious ACPI_VIDEO_NOTIFY_PROBE events lead to spurious KEY_SWITCHVIDEOMODE key-presses being reported uses an Intel iGPU with an AMD dGPU. I don't have any hybrid gfx systems available for testing atm, but I believe that in this case there will be 2 ACPI video-busses, one for each GPU. Note I'm not saying that that means that checking the originating ACPI device is the companion of the GPUs PCI-device is the solution here. But so far all I've heard from you is that that is not the solution, without you offering any alternative ideas / possible solutions to try for filtering out these spurious key-presses. Regards, Hans _______________________________________________ amd-gfx mailing list amd-gfx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/amd-gfx
