On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 6:48 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi, > > On 28-11-18 18:18, Schmauss, Erik wrote: > > <big snip> > > >> Repeating myself I'm somewhat surprised by your and Bob's objections > >> against my approach, since it gets acpica out of the game of having to guess > >> what the LEN field means / when to use then LEN field and I expected that > >> both you and Bob would actually be quite happy to no longer having to do > >> that. > > This is a good point.. > > > > Bob and I have talked it over. We'll accept your patch as long as your surface 3 also > > boots and behaves as expected with this patch > > I don't have a surface 3, I got involved in the whole surface 3 discussion > because I was trying to help to get the battery monitoring support for it > upstream, but I don't have one myself. > > Still I don't see how this can break the surface 3, since we simply end up > potentially copying more data to the tmp-buffer then before my patch and > if the Surface 3's opregion driver does not expect that data to be there > it will simply ignore it. > > I will ask Benjamin Tissoires to test 4.20 + my patch on his Surface 3 > to double-check, but in the mean time I believe it is really time to get > this fix into 4.20 now. Thanks Hans for all of this work. And thanks everybody for taking care of this problem. I just tested the patch on top of 4.20-rc, and I can confirm that this doesn't regress on the Surface 3. So it is fine from my HW point of view to apply it. Cheers, Benjamin > > > Thanks for your efforts! > > You're welcome. > > Regards, > > Hans
