On Mon, Feb 27, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> On 27-02-17 14:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>
>> +Mika & Andy
>>
>> On Saturday, February 25, 2017 07:23:28 PM Hans de Goede wrote:
>>>
>>> Several cherrytrail devices (all of which ship with windows 10) hide the
>>> lpss pwm controller in ACPI, typically the _STA method looks like this:
>>>
>>> Method (_STA, 0, NotSerialized) // _STA: Status
>>> {
>>> If (OSID == One)
>>> {
>>> Return (Zero)
>>> }
>>>
>>> Return (0x0F)
>>> }
>>>
>>> Where OSID is some dark magic seen in all cherrytrail ACPI tables making
>>> the machine behave differently depending on which OS it *thinks* it is
>>> booting, this gets set in a number of ways which we cannot control, on
>>> some newer machines it simple hardcoded to "One" aka win10.
>>>
>>> This causes the PWM controller to get hidden, which means Linux cannot
>>> control the backlight level on cht based tablets / laptops.
>>>
>>> Since loading the driver for this does no harm (the only in kernel user
>>> of it is the i915 driver, which will only use it when it needs it), this
>>> commit makes acpi_bus_get_status() always set status to ACPI_STA_DEFAULT
>>> for the 80862288 device, fixing the lack of backlight control.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/acpi/bus.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>>> index 95855cb..483d4d0 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
>>> @@ -109,11 +109,36 @@ acpi_status acpi_bus_get_status_handle(acpi_handle
>>> handle,
>>> return status;
>>> }
>>>
>>> +/*
>>> + * Some ACPI devices are hidden (status == 0x0) in recent BIOS-es
>>> because
>>> + * some recent windows drivers bind to one device but poke at multiple
>>> + * devices at the same time, so the others get hidden.
>>> + * We work around this by always reporting ACPI_STA_DEFAULT for these
>>> + * devices. Note this MUST only be done for devices where this is safe.
>>> + */
>>> +static const struct acpi_device_id always_present_device_ids[] = {
>>> + /*
>>> + * Cherrytrail pwm directly poked by GPU driver in win10,
>>> + * but Linux uses a separate pwm driver, harmless if not used.
>>> + */
>>> + { "80862288", },
>>> + { }
>>> +};
>>> +
>>> int acpi_bus_get_status(struct acpi_device *device)
>>> {
>>> acpi_status status;
>>> unsigned long long sta;
>>>
>>> + /* acpi_match_device_ids checks status, so start with default */
>>> + acpi_set_device_status(device, ACPI_STA_DEFAULT);
>>
>>
>> This shouldn't be done in a "get" routine.
>
>
> With this you mean the acpi_match_device_ids() check I assume ?
> (acpi_bus_get_status already calls acpi_set_device_status())
Yes, the device ID check.
>> Ideally, a scan handler should do that or similar.
>
>
> The problem is that drivers/acpi/scan.c: acpi_bus_attach()
> calls acpi_bus_get_status() and if it does not set
> the status to present acpi_bus_attach() exits without bothering
> with attaching scan handlers, which is why I ended up doing this
> here.
Fair enough.
Two problems with this approach.
One is that it doesn't prevent _STA from being evaluated as
acpi_bus_get_status_handle() is called directly from a couple of
places.
Second, what if the same device ID is used on another system where
_STA actually works correctly for that device?
Thanks,
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
