On 10/1/2021 23:18, Sachi King wrote:
The Surface Laptop 4 AMD has used the AMD0005 to identify this
controller instead of using the appropriate ACPI ID AMDI0005. The
AMD0005 needs the same special casing as AMDI0005.
Rafael, if you don't mind can you please add this to the commit message
when you pick this up for future reference in case we need to come back
to the ACPI tables that prompted this:
Link:
https://github.com/linux-surface/acpidumps/tree/master/surface_laptop_4_amd
Cc: <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> # 5.14+
Signed-off-by: Sachi King <nakato@xxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Mario Limonciello <mario.limonciello@xxxxxxx>
---
drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
index bd92b549fd5a..1c48358b43ba 100644
--- a/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
+++ b/drivers/acpi/x86/s2idle.c
@@ -371,7 +371,7 @@ static int lps0_device_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
return 0;
if (acpi_s2idle_vendor_amd()) {
- /* AMD0004, AMDI0005:
+ /* AMD0004, AMD0005, AMDI0005:
* - Should use rev_id 0x0
* - function mask > 0x3: Should use AMD method, but has off by one bug
* - function mask = 0x3: Should use Microsoft method
@@ -390,6 +390,7 @@ static int lps0_device_attach(struct acpi_device *adev,
ACPI_LPS0_DSM_UUID_MICROSOFT, 0,
&lps0_dsm_guid_microsoft);
if (lps0_dsm_func_mask > 0x3 && (!strcmp(hid, "AMD0004") ||
+ !strcmp(hid, "AMD0005") ||
!strcmp(hid, "AMDI0005"))) {
lps0_dsm_func_mask = (lps0_dsm_func_mask << 1) | 0x1;
acpi_handle_debug(adev->handle, "_DSM UUID %s: Adjusted function mask: 0x%x\n",
