Hi Rafael, On 5/15/20 6:28 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2020 at 7:52 AM Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:On Asus T101HA, we keep receiving those error messages: i915 0000:00:02.0: [drm] *ERROR* mipi_exec_pmic failed, error: -95 intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element: Not implemented intel_soc_pmic_exec_mipi_pmic_seq_element: i2c-addr: 0x5e reg-addr 0x4b value 0x59 mask 0xff Because the opregion is missing the I2C address. Suggested-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@xxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c index 7ccd7d9660bc..a5101b07611a 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/pmic/intel_pmic_chtdc_ti.c @@ -102,6 +102,7 @@ static struct intel_pmic_opregion_data chtdc_ti_pmic_opregion_data = { .power_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(chtdc_ti_power_table), .thermal_table = chtdc_ti_thermal_table, .thermal_table_count = ARRAY_SIZE(chtdc_ti_thermal_table), + .pmic_i2c_address = 0x5e, }; static int chtdc_ti_pmic_opregion_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) --This appears to be part of a series, but the second patch has not been CCed to linux-acpi.
Mauro send out 3 patches related to the PMIC, this one and 2 MFD patches. I think his intention was to send out this standalone and the 2 MFD patches as a series, but instead he send out this 1 + 1 MFD patch as a series and the other MFD patch as a standalone patch. Either way this patch is a standalone patch, the 2/2 patch is almost completely unrelated, so if you can pick this one up, then that would be great. Regards, Hans
