On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:10 PM Benjamin Tissoires <btissoir@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > 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. Thank you for the confirmation. I'm going to send a pull request including this patch later today.
