Hello Marcel,
On 04/09/2015 21:13, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
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?
OK
+ .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?
Yes, I will use it.
+ },
+ },
+#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?
OK, will be removed.
+ { }
+};
+
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.
OK.
I will also use dmi_system_id.driver_data to store the correct polarity
for T100TA.
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
Fred
--
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
