> Dell platform team told us that some (DMI whitelisted) Dell Latitude
> machines have ST microelectronics accelerometer at i2c address 0x29. That
> i2c address is not specified in DMI or ACPI, so runtime detection without
> whitelist which is below is not possible.
>
> Presence of that ST microelectronics accelerometer is verified by existence
> of SMO88xx ACPI device which represent that accelerometer. Unfortunately
> without i2c address.
This part of the commit message sounded a bit confusing to me at first
because there is already an ACPI driver which handles SMO88xx devices
(dell-smo8800). My understanding is that:
* the purpose of this patch is to expose a richer interface (as
provided by lis3lv02d) to these devices on some machines,
* on whitelisted machines, dell-smo8800 and lis3lv02d can work
simultaneously (even though dell-smo8800 effectively duplicates the
work that lis3lv02d does).
If I got something wrong, please correct me. If I got it right, it
might make sense to rephrase the commit message a bit so that the first
bullet point above is immediately clear to the reader.
>
> This patch registers lis3lv02d device at i2c address 0x29 if is detected.
>
> Finally commit a7ae81952cda ("i2c: i801: Allow ACPI SystemIO OpRegion to
> conflict with PCI BAR") allowed to use i2c-i801 driver on Dell machines so
> lis3lv02d correctly initialize accelerometer.
>
> Tested on Dell Latitude E6440.
>
> Signed-off-by: Pali Rohár <pali.rohar@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c | 98 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 98 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
> index eb3627f..188cfd4 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-i801.c
> @@ -1118,6 +1118,101 @@ static void dmi_check_onboard_devices(const struct dmi_header *dm, void *adap)
> }
> }
>
> +static acpi_status check_acpi_smo88xx_device(acpi_handle obj_handle,
> + u32 nesting_level,
> + void *context,
> + void **return_value)
> +{
> + struct acpi_device_info *info;
> + acpi_status status;
> + char *hid;
> +
> + status = acpi_get_object_info(obj_handle, &info);
acpi_get_object_info() allocates the returned buffer, which the caller
has to free.
> + if (!ACPI_SUCCESS(status) || !(info->valid & ACPI_VALID_HID))
> + return AE_OK;
> +
> + hid = info->hardware_id.string;
> + if (!hid)
> + return AE_OK;
> +
> + if (strlen(hid) < 7)
> + return AE_OK;
> +
> + if (memcmp(hid, "SMO88", 5) != 0)
> + return AE_OK;
> +
> + *((bool *)return_value) = true;
> + return AE_CTRL_TERMINATE;
> +}
> +
> +static bool is_dell_system_with_lis3lv02d(void)
> +{
> + bool found;
> + acpi_status status;
> + const char *vendor;
> +
> + vendor = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_SYS_VENDOR);
> + if (strcmp(vendor, "Dell Inc.") != 0)
> + return false;
> +
> + /*
> + * Check if ACPI device SMO88xx exists and if is enabled. That ACPI
> + * device represent our ST microelectronics lis3lv02d accelerometer but
> + * unfortunately without any other additional information.
> + */
> + found = false;
> + status = acpi_get_devices(NULL, check_acpi_smo88xx_device, NULL,
> + (void **)&found);
> + if (!ACPI_SUCCESS(status) || !found)
> + return false;
> +
> + return true;
> +}
> +
> +/*
> + * Dell platform team told us that these Latitude devices have
> + * ST microelectronics accelerometer at i2c address 0x29.
> + * That i2c address is not specified in DMI or ACPI, so runtime
> + * detection without whitelist which is below is not possible.
> + */
> +static const char * const dmi_dell_product_names[] = {
> + "Latitude E5250",
> + "Latitude E5450",
> + "Latitude E5550",
> + "Latitude E6440",
> + "Latitude E6440 ATG",
> + "Latitude E6540",
> +};
> +
> +static void register_dell_lis3lv02d_i2c_device(struct i801_priv *priv)
> +{
> + struct i2c_board_info info;
> + const char *product_name;
> + bool known_i2c_address;
> + int i;
> +
> + known_i2c_address = false;
> + product_name = dmi_get_system_info(DMI_PRODUCT_NAME);
> + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(dmi_dell_product_names); ++i) {
> + if (strcmp(product_name, dmi_dell_product_names[i]) == 0) {
> + known_i2c_address = true;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!known_i2c_address) {
> + dev_warn(&priv->pci_dev->dev,
> + "Accelerometer lis3lv02d i2c device is present "
> + "but its i2c address is unknown, skipping ...\n");
You are probably well aware of this, but checkpatch prefers keeping long
log messages in one line. I am pointing it out just in case.
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + memset(&info, 0, sizeof(struct i2c_board_info));
How about just doing "struct i2c_board_info info = { 0 };" instead?
> + info.addr = 0x29;
> + strlcpy(info.type, "lis3lv02d", I2C_NAME_SIZE);
> + i2c_new_device(&priv->adapter, &info);
> +}
> +
> /* Register optional slaves */
> static void i801_probe_optional_slaves(struct i801_priv *priv)
> {
> @@ -1136,6 +1231,9 @@ static void i801_probe_optional_slaves(struct i801_priv *priv)
>
> if (dmi_name_in_vendors("FUJITSU"))
> dmi_walk(dmi_check_onboard_devices, &priv->adapter);
> +
> + if (is_dell_system_with_lis3lv02d())
> + register_dell_lis3lv02d_i2c_device(priv);
> }
> #else
> static void __init input_apanel_init(void) {}
> --
> 1.7.9.5
>
I tested this patch on a Vostro V131, which is not on the whitelist, so
all I got was the warning message, but to this extent, it works for me.
--
Best regards,
Michał Kępień
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
