Hi Fred,
> ACPI table for BCM2E39 of T100TA is not correct.
> Invert irq_polarity for this device.
>
> Signed-off-by: Frederic Danis <frederic.danis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm.c b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm.c
> index f306541..efb9566 100644
> --- a/drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm.c
> +++ b/drivers/bluetooth/hci_bcm.c
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
> #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/tty.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> +#include <linux/dmi.h>
>
> #include <net/bluetooth/bluetooth.h>
> #include <net/bluetooth/hci_core.h>
> @@ -546,6 +547,20 @@ static int bcm_resource(struct acpi_resource *ares, void *data)
> return 1;
> }
>
> +/* IRQ polarity of some chipset are not defined correctly in ACPI table. */
> +static const struct dmi_system_id bcm_wrong_irq_dmi_table[] = {
> +#if defined(CONFIG_DMI) && defined(CONFIG_X86)
> + {
> + /* Asus T100TA */
I think instead of a comment you could just fill in .ident here. Or is that suppose to be used for something else?
> + .matches = {
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_SYS_VENDOR, "ASUSTeK COMPUTER INC."),
> + DMI_MATCH(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME, "T100TA"),
Why are we not using DMI_EXACT_MATCH here in the first place. We really know which one is broken, correct?
> + },
> + },
> +#endif
What is this #ifdef buying us? Is include/linux/dmi.h in some way that we can not have this defined all the time?
> + { }
> +};
> +
> static int bcm_acpi_probe(struct bcm_device *dev)
> {
> struct platform_device *pdev = dev->pdev;
> @@ -608,6 +623,12 @@ static int bcm_acpi_probe(struct bcm_device *dev)
>
> acpi_dev_get_resources(adev, &resources, bcm_resource, dev);
>
> + if (strstr(id->id, "BCM2E39") &&
Lets not bother with that check and just always run through the DMI table here. Especially when using DMI_EXACT_MATCH that should not be a problem.
If however that causes a problem, then I prefer we actually set .driver_data in the ACPI module table and base the check on the .driver_data instead of checking the string here once more.
I really don't know if BCM2E39 is specific to a single design or manufacture or platform. I am not sure how good we are in not accidentally re-using these IDs.
> + dmi_check_system(bcm_wrong_irq_dmi_table)) {
> + bt_dev_dbg(dev, "Fix irq polarity");
> + dev->irq_polarity = !dev->irq_polarity;
> + }
> +
> return 0;
> }
> #else
Regards
Marcel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
